politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Great Corbyn leader rating divide
Comments
-
No, because ISIS is Sunni. What he is trying to do is the make it non-Sectarian, by letting the Sunnis sort their own house out.dugarbandier said:http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/22/marco-rubio-isis-strategy-us-troops-exclusive-interview
"The only way to defeat Isis is for Sunni Arabs themselves to reject them ideologically and defeat them militarily,” Rubio said. “They must be defeated on the ground with a ground force that is made up primarily of Arab Sunni fighters from Iraq, from Syria, but also from Jordan, from Egypt, from the Emirates, from Saudi Arabia.”
Is Rubio's plan a sectarian regional war with the US on one side and Russia on the other?0 -
Out of interest the US also has some quite hard-to-defend external borders. Are there any moves to introduce identity controls when you move between states?Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.0 -
Sad straw man argument... up to your usual standardedmundintokyo said:
Out of interest the US also has some quite hard-to-defend external borders. Are there any moves to introduce identity controls when you move between states?Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.
The USA has a demos, it believes its one country, the EU except for some of the chattering classes, doesn't. If there is a security problem in say Paris and it doesn't get fixed, the French government loses the election, not the EU Commission. The French government therefore needs to at least look like it is trying to solve the problem to survive, and strangely it doesn't have much say over German or Hungarian border control, so it closes/controls the French borders, its pure political survival.0 -
Hammond's defence cuts are to be partly reversed. Should we sell shares in the Foreign Secretary's leadership project?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34897076
Meanwhile, Her Majesty's Daily Telegraph reports there's a Russian submarine off Scotland: a contingency apparently unforeseen by Hammond, unless of course he'd backed Yes in IndyRef.
French patrol planes are scouring the seas off Scotland for a Russian submarine after Britain was forced to call on allies for help because it has scrapped its own sub-hunting aircraft.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12010438/Britain-calls-in-French-to-hunt-Russian-sub-lurking-off-Scotland.html0 -
Sub-hunting aircraft that were massively over-budget, years late and not yet in operation.DecrepitJohnL said:Hammond's defence cuts are to be partly reversed. Should we sell shares in the Foreign Secretary's leadership project?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34897076
Meanwhile, Her Majesty's Daily Telegraph reports there's a Russian submarine off Scotland: a contingency apparently unforeseen by Hammond, unless of course he'd backed Yes in IndyRef.
French patrol planes are scouring the seas off Scotland for a Russian submarine after Britain was forced to call on allies for help because it has scrapped its own sub-hunting aircraft.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12010438/Britain-calls-in-French-to-hunt-Russian-sub-lurking-off-Scotland.html0 -
Not really, all kinds of security-critical things in the US, not least availability of weapons, are controlled by the states.Indigo said:
Sad straw man argument... up to your usual standardedmundintokyo said:
Out of interest the US also has some quite hard-to-defend external borders. Are there any moves to introduce identity controls when you move between states?Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.
The USA has a demos, it believes its one country, the EU except for some of the chattering classes, doesn't. If there is a security problem in say Paris and it doesn't get fixed, the French government loses the election, not the EU Commission. The French government therefore needs to at least look like it is trying to solve the problem to survive, and strangely it doesn't have much say over German or Hungarian border control, so it closes/controls the French borders, its pure political survival.0 -
Ha Ha Ha , you could not make it up , and on here yesterday they were trumpeting about us being a world power, now we are down to begging the French to defend us.DecrepitJohnL said:Hammond's defence cuts are to be partly reversed. Should we sell shares in the Foreign Secretary's leadership project?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34897076
Meanwhile, Her Majesty's Daily Telegraph reports there's a Russian submarine off Scotland: a contingency apparently unforeseen by Hammond, unless of course he'd backed Yes in IndyRef.
French patrol planes are scouring the seas off Scotland for a Russian submarine after Britain was forced to call on allies for help because it has scrapped its own sub-hunting aircraft.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12010438/Britain-calls-in-French-to-hunt-Russian-sub-lurking-off-Scotland.html0 -
Yes and our thick politicians rather than buy something that works would rather squander billions and end up with nothing , kind of says it all.JosiasJessop said:
Sub-hunting aircraft that were massively over-budget, years late and not yet in operation.DecrepitJohnL said:Hammond's defence cuts are to be partly reversed. Should we sell shares in the Foreign Secretary's leadership project?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34897076
Meanwhile, Her Majesty's Daily Telegraph reports there's a Russian submarine off Scotland: a contingency apparently unforeseen by Hammond, unless of course he'd backed Yes in IndyRef.
French patrol planes are scouring the seas off Scotland for a Russian submarine after Britain was forced to call on allies for help because it has scrapped its own sub-hunting aircraft.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12010438/Britain-calls-in-French-to-hunt-Russian-sub-lurking-off-Scotland.html0 -
I also see the referendum promises unravelling even further as they cut plans for Type 26 Frigates.0
-
Seems fair - one of our Type 45s is escorting the French Aircraft carrier, Charles de Gaulle....DecrepitJohnL said:
French patrol planes are scouring the seas off Scotland for a Russian submarine after Britain was forced to call on allies for help because it has scrapped its own sub-hunting aircraft.0 -
Except that since there are no state borders if you want a firearm your state doesn't allow people to sell, you drive to the next door state that does, and bring one back, no borders = no control. The bit that matters, ownership, is federal.edmundintokyo said:
Not really, all kinds of security-critical things in the US, not least availability of weapons, are controlled by the states.Indigo said:
Sad straw man argument... up to your usual standardedmundintokyo said:
Out of interest the US also has some quite hard-to-defend external borders. Are there any moves to introduce identity controls when you move between states?Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.
The USA has a demos, it believes its one country, the EU except for some of the chattering classes, doesn't. If there is a security problem in say Paris and it doesn't get fixed, the French government loses the election, not the EU Commission. The French government therefore needs to at least look like it is trying to solve the problem to survive, and strangely it doesn't have much say over German or Hungarian border control, so it closes/controls the French borders, its pure political survival.0 -
A Type 26 is still better for jobs than a handful of Fisheries Protection Vessels......malcolmg said:I also see the referendum promises unravelling even further as they cut plans for Type 26 Frigates.
0 -
There wasn't much 'that worked' and met our requirements when the MRA4 project was launched back in the 1990s. Even if we'd gone with a new jet-based platform instead of the Nimrod, there'd have been the problems the Yanks have been having with the Boeing P-8 Poseidon.malcolmg said:
Yes and our thick politicians rather than buy something that works would rather squander billions and end up with nothing , kind of says it all.JosiasJessop said:
Sub-hunting aircraft that were massively over-budget, years late and not yet in operation.DecrepitJohnL said:Hammond's defence cuts are to be partly reversed. Should we sell shares in the Foreign Secretary's leadership project?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34897076
Meanwhile, Her Majesty's Daily Telegraph reports there's a Russian submarine off Scotland: a contingency apparently unforeseen by Hammond, unless of course he'd backed Yes in IndyRef.
French patrol planes are scouring the seas off Scotland for a Russian submarine after Britain was forced to call on allies for help because it has scrapped its own sub-hunting aircraft.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12010438/Britain-calls-in-French-to-hunt-Russian-sub-lurking-off-Scotland.html
You could - and some do - argue that our requirements were wrong. But that's a different matter.0 -
No borders equals no control, that's my point. From a security point of view the argument for gun control states to maintain borders to keep out people from sell-weapons-to-nutters states far outweights any theoretical gain you might hope to get by putting borders between Greece amd France.Indigo said:
Except that since there are no state borders if you want a firearm your state doesn't allow people to sell, you drive to the next door state that does, and bring one back, no borders = no control. The bit that matters, ownership, is federal.edmundintokyo said:
Not really, all kinds of security-critical things in the US, not least availability of weapons, are controlled by the states.Indigo said:
Sad straw man argument... up to your usual standardedmundintokyo said:
Out of interest the US also has some quite hard-to-defend external borders. Are there any moves to introduce identity controls when you move between states?Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.
The USA has a demos, it believes its one country, the EU except for some of the chattering classes, doesn't. If there is a security problem in say Paris and it doesn't get fixed, the French government loses the election, not the EU Commission. The French government therefore needs to at least look like it is trying to solve the problem to survive, and strangely it doesn't have much say over German or Hungarian border control, so it closes/controls the French borders, its pure political survival.0 -
But if the French government trusts the Greece government to administer their borders properly, and they fail in this regard, and another terrorist incident happens in Paris as a result, it will be the French government that loses its job, not the Greek government. The French government uses the only controls that are available to them, that what even if those controls turn out to be ineffective, at least they have the appearance of having taken action.edmundintokyo said:
No borders equals no control, that's my point. From a security point of view the argument for gun control states to maintain borders to keep out people from sell-weapons-to-nutters states far outweights any theoretical gain you might hope to get by putting borders between Greece amd France.Indigo said:
Except that since there are no state borders if you want a firearm your state doesn't allow people to sell, you drive to the next door state that does, and bring one back, no borders = no control. The bit that matters, ownership, is federal.edmundintokyo said:
Not really, all kinds of security-critical things in the US, not least availability of weapons, are controlled by the states.Indigo said:
Sad straw man argument... up to your usual standardedmundintokyo said:Out of interest the US also has some quite hard-to-defend external borders. Are there any moves to introduce identity controls when you move between states?
The USA has a demos, it believes its one country, the EU except for some of the chattering classes, doesn't. If there is a security problem in say Paris and it doesn't get fixed, the French government loses the election, not the EU Commission. The French government therefore needs to at least look like it is trying to solve the problem to survive, and strangely it doesn't have much say over German or Hungarian border control, so it closes/controls the French borders, its pure political survival.
The whole idea of "Fortress Europe" is on a hiding to nothing, national governments on the borders will neither be prepared to pay for it, nor take responsibility for it, particularly if idiots like Merkel go around shouting about how all are welcome, or maybe not.0 -
@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.0
-
Hopefully one that works and actually flies.Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
0 -
Good morning, everyone.
BBC Director General is bleating today, but the bit I want to highlight is this:
"Future licence fee negotiations should, he says, be made with the input of licence fee payers possibly by an online vote."
Yes, because online voting isn't wide open to hacking, is it?
Clown. Not to mention you can't have individuals deciding on a specific tax. Are we to have votes on how much income tax we'd like to pay?
Then there's this bit:
"Instead, he is calling for the charter period to be extended to 11 years, which would take it out of the electoral cycle and that any changes to the system should only be changed in Parliament with a two thirds majority and a vote by licence fee payers."
That's demented. That would give it greater protection than, say, NHS funding. Or Trident. The underlying belief seems to be that the BBC is the single most sacred institution in the UK.
It's certainly important, and very popular (although perhaps not amongst some F1 fans), but it's not an idol to be placed on a pedestal and admired without consideration.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-348942500 -
I wonder if he wants changes that advantage the BBC - like the rather worrying idea that viewing delayed programming on the Internet will require a licence fee - to be subject to such rigorous changes?Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
BBC Director General is bleating today, but the bit I want to highlight is this:
"Future licence fee negotiations should, he says, be made with the input of licence fee payers possibly by an online vote."
Yes, because online voting isn't wide open to hacking, is it?
Clown. Not to mention you can't have individuals deciding on a specific tax. Are we to have votes on how much income tax we'd like to pay?
Then there's this bit:
"Instead, he is calling for the charter period to be extended to 11 years, which would take it out of the electoral cycle and that any changes to the system should only be changed in Parliament with a two thirds majority and a vote by licence fee payers."
That's demented. That would give it greater protection than, say, NHS funding. Or Trident. The underlying belief seems to be that the BBC is the single most sacred institution in the UK.
It's certainly important, and very popular (although perhaps not amongst some F1 fans), but it's not an idol to be placed on a pedestal and admired without consideration.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-34894250
As you say, the whole thing's demented. The BBC have some very good technical bods who'll be able to tell him that electronic voting is pants. Yet the BBC bosses are not known for listening to their technical bods, and the 'talent' (as Roger would call the presenters and stars) treat them with contempt.0 -
Take a look at @ProfBrianCox's Tweet: https://twitter.com/ProfBrianCox/status/668701105061277697?s=090
-
I see Prince Charles is going for the Charlotte Church line that climate change causes terrorism.
Please, just shut up. I was feeling a bit of sympathy for him recently - nope, skip him.0 -
@hopisen: That was peculiar - woke from dream about election, went downstairs for coffee, put on radio and it's @Ed_Miliband on responsible capitalism0
-
Miss Plato, *sighs*
Daft cock.
Edited extra bit: to clarify, that refers to Charles, not Miss Plato
0 -
The man's a foolMorris_Dancer said:That's demented. That would give it greater protection than, say, NHS funding. Or Trident. The underlying belief seems to be that the BBC is the single most sacred institution in the UK.
BBC Charter (Removal of idiotic restrictions) (2020) is a one line bill that amends that law to require only an normal majority to change the rules. The rules are then changed in the usual manner by a majority vote in parliament.
0 -
Ed Miliband: I’m not going to be a backstreet driver
Jim Naughtie: Having crashed the car?
Miliband: Thanks
#r4today0 -
Licence fee negotiations are made with the input of licence fee payers. They're called general elections.0
-
a classic.Plato_Says said:Ed Miliband: I’m not going to be a backstreet driver
Jim Naughtie: Having crashed the car?
Miliband: Thanks
#r4today0 -
I don't want the BBC gutted or politically interfered with, but as the gambit of a negotiation tactic, that preposal of protection is preposterous.0
-
It's funny but it was wholly gratuitous. It's not as though Ed Miliband is a front rank politician any more. The only reason for making the remark was to show Jim Naughtie is clever. It's disrespectful of a guest to no purpose.Plato_Says said:Ed Miliband: I’m not going to be a backstreet driver
Jim Naughtie: Having crashed the car?
Miliband: Thanks
#r4today0 -
Joan Bakewell and another woman calling for the women's pension age to be increased to match men's more slowly, or compensation for women adversely affected.
I'd like to see these two stupid women wanting compensation for the millions of men who have had to work longer than women for generations.
She's keen to cry 'injustice', when the injustice seems very gender-specific.0 -
all fast food strikes me as unhealthy, I haven't eaten a maacy d or a burger king for years.. I would rather go hungry.notme said:
There are very very few 'unhealthy foods'.Chris_A said:
It's not. It's the treating of it that's expensive.AndyJS said:Why is it expensive to prevent diabetes? The answer is for people to stop eating unhealthy food, advice that costs nothing.
Chris_A said:
Well it's the Economist's graph. The answer is probably in the second sentence. We need more staff and we have to stop people becoming unwell in the first place. Treating easily preventable illness - diabetes, hypertension, obesity etc is expensive.Philip_Thompson said:
Despite less state funding as your graph shows. Why is that and what lessons can we learn from them?Chris_A said:
Includes countries such as Chile, Mexico, Turkey.glw said:
Yeah we spend more than the OECD average, and more the Spain and Italy which as far as I know have decent healthcare. To my eyes the thing that stands out is that our private sector is relatively small, perhaps we need to expand that alongside some rationing of less essential NHS services to encourage people to go private.RobD said:I'm not sure that the chart shows why the Doctors are striking.
Spain and Italy do do better than us for life expectancy. Both have far more doctors per capita than us.
Advice and education is cheaper but budgets are being cut, and the Tories leap up and down screaming "nanny state" at any meaningful health initiatives re tax on unhealthy food, or unhealthy lifestyle choices.0 -
I have some sympathy for this cause - past changes weren't exactly trumpeted. However, the name of the action group - Women Against State Pension Inequality - is a calculated insult to the intelligence. They want to extend state pension inequality.JosiasJessop said:Joan Bakewell and another woman calling for the women's pension age to be increased to match men's more slowly, or compensation for women adversely affected.
I'd like to see these two stupid women wanting compensation for the millions of men who have had to work longer than women for generations.
She's keen to cry 'injustice', when the injustice seems very gender-specific.0 -
Mr. Jessop, reminds me of the focus of women in the boardroom, but the same people don't care there's such a lack of male primary school teachers (meaning many kids, who don't have fathers living with them, lack make role models almost entirely).0
-
I disagree. He is still an MP, someone who has a voice and vote on national frontline issues most other people do not. He may not be on the front bench but as part of our collective ruling body he does not deserve or need kid glove handling. The disrespectful point may have some validity, but further context is needed. Was he doing a 'not going to comment, but' type thing, was he avoiding answering a question, and so on. In that scenario a non interjection like that would be quite appropriate.AlastairMeeks said:
It's funny but it was wholly gratuitous. It's not as though Ed Miliband is a front rank politician any more. The only reason for making the remark was to show Jim Naughtie is clever. It's disrespectful of a guest to no purpose.Plato_Says said:Ed Miliband: I’m not going to be a backstreet driver
Jim Naughtie: Having crashed the car?
Miliband: Thanks
#r4today
0 -
Where on earth do you get that idea?notme said:
There are very very few 'unhealthy foods'.Chris_A said:
It's not. It's the treating of it that's expensive.AndyJS said:Why is it expensive to prevent diabetes? The answer is for people to stop eating unhealthy food, advice that costs nothing.
Chris_A said:
Well it's the Economist's graph. The answer is probably in the second sentence. We need more staff and we have to stop people becoming unwell in the first place. Treating easily preventable illness - diabetes, hypertension, obesity etc is expensive.Philip_Thompson said:
Despite less state funding as your graph shows. Why is that and what lessons can we learn from them?Chris_A said:
Includes countries such as Chile, Mexico, Turkey.glw said:
Yeah we spend more than the OECD average, and more the Spain and Italy which as far as I know have decent healthcare. To my eyes the thing that stands out is that our private sector is relatively small, perhaps we need to expand that alongside some rationing of less essential NHS services to encourage people to go private.RobD said:I'm not sure that the chart shows why the Doctors are striking.
Spain and Italy do do better than us for life expectancy. Both have far more doctors per capita than us.
Advice and education is cheaper but budgets are being cut, and the Tories leap up and down screaming "nanny state" at any meaningful health initiatives re tax on unhealthy food, or unhealthy lifestyle choices.
0 -
Respect is earned.AlastairMeeks said:
It's funny but it was wholly gratuitous. It's not as though Ed Miliband is a front rank politician any more. The only reason for making the remark was to show Jim Naughtie is clever. It's disrespectful of a guest to no purpose.Plato_Says said:Ed Miliband: I’m not going to be a backstreet driver
Jim Naughtie: Having crashed the car?
Miliband: Thanks
#r4today0 -
Apparently EdM said Corbyn was suitable for PM as well. Oh and climate change was the biggest political threat today.
Nitwit.kle4 said:
I disagree. He is still an MP, someone who has a voice and vote on national frontline issues most other people do not. He may not be on the front bench but as part of our collective ruling body he does not deserve or need kid glove handling. The disrespectful point may have some validity, but further context is needed. Was he doing a 'not going to comment, but' type thing, was he avoiding answering a question, and so on. In that scenario a non interjection like that would be quite appropriate.AlastairMeeks said:
It's funny but it was wholly gratuitous. It's not as though Ed Miliband is a front rank politician any more. The only reason for making the remark was to show Jim Naughtie is clever. It's disrespectful of a guest to no purpose.Plato_Says said:Ed Miliband: I’m not going to be a backstreet driver
Jim Naughtie: Having crashed the car?
Miliband: Thanks
#r4today0 -
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
0 -
Miss Plato, to be fair, rising water levels have caused Brussels to be closed today.0
-
After Labour's problems with National Security matters, at least this week attention will focus somewhat on a different area in which it is much stronger.
Economic management.
oh.0 -
Naughtie is incredibly pleased with himselfAlastairMeeks said:
It's funny but it was wholly gratuitous. It's not as though Ed Miliband is a front rank politician any more. The only reason for making the remark was to show Jim Naughtie is clever. It's disrespectful of a guest to no purpose.Plato_Says said:Ed Miliband: I’m not going to be a backstreet driver
Jim Naughtie: Having crashed the car?
Miliband: Thanks
#r4today
0 -
I see Prince Charles is saying climate change is to blame for the refugee crisis. As a monarchist much more of this I'll become a Republican.0
-
WE should have bought AWACS?? I think that's what they were called, much cheaper American and worked. They were still using Avro Shackletons IIRC long after they were beyond their sell by date.CarlottaVance said:
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
0 -
Schengen just codified what has been the case in Europe for most of the past war period. The Benelux countries abolished border controls in 1953, for example.Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.
0 -
It needed to be said. I am glad he said it.blackburn63 said:
Naughtie is incredibly pleased with himselfAlastairMeeks said:
It's funny but it was wholly gratuitous. It's not as though Ed Miliband is a front rank politician any more. The only reason for making the remark was to show Jim Naughtie is clever. It's disrespectful of a guest to no purpose.Plato_Says said:Ed Miliband: I’m not going to be a backstreet driver
Jim Naughtie: Having crashed the car?
Miliband: Thanks
#r4today0 -
Allegedly one of the few aircraft projects where the electronics systems were ready years before the airframe ...CarlottaVance said:
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
0 -
@BBCNormanS: Its understood Govt is to allow French bombers to use RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus for attacks on IS in #syria0
-
Mr. 63, I hope not.
Good monarchs and bad monarchs both come and go. The alternative is a presidency.
Better Charles than a President Blair, Cameron or Corbyn.
That said, Charles is barking mad.0 -
Possibly the worst defence of the monarchy ever.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 63, I hope not.
Good monarchs and bad monarchs both come and go. The alternative is a presidency.
Better Charles than a President Blair, Cameron or Corbyn.
That said, Charles is barking mad.0 -
Weirdly, I agreed with the Government on this one. The upgraded Nimrods used the same airframes as the original Nimrods, which used the original airframes from the old Comet 4s, and they were way past the point where you could do anything with them. The airframes were built in the 1950s and production techniques weren't as consistent then, so you'd build a part for one airframe then discover that it wouldn't fit another because the measurements differed slightly from one plane to another. Back then you'd make the pieces fit with a big hammer but you can't do that with composite nor small pieces. When you combine that with the s***** way we build defence stuff (see FRES for an example), you ended up with a tin money pit. Although I object to them being cut up (WE HAVE MUSEUMS!), killing the program dead wasn't a bad thing to do.Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
0 -
Mr. Jonathan, nonsense.
If a system has flaws but the alternative is worse, you go for the former not the latter.0 -
I travelled by train from Paris to Amsterdam the day after the Paris attacks - I had worried when the night before Mitterrand had declared he would close France's borders.rcs1000 said:
Schengen just codified what has been the case in Europe for most of the past war period. The Benelux countries abolished border controls in 1953, for example.Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.
As it happens I was not checked once, from boarding in Paris Nord to leaving Amsterdam Centraal - no tickets, no passport, nothing.
But then I had bought the ticket online, so its entirely possible those who needed to know knew exactly who was sitting in my seat.....0 -
Yes its the alternative to a monarch that terrifies me, but if our King is going to spout such bollox he'll lose a lot of support and sympathy.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 63, I hope not.
Good monarchs and bad monarchs both come and go. The alternative is a presidency.
Better Charles than a President Blair, Cameron or Corbyn.
That said, Charles is barking mad.
0 -
And see how safe Belgium is as a result... A drop-in centre for Jihadis.rcs1000 said:
Schengen just codified what has been the case in Europe for most of the past war period. The Benelux countries abolished border controls in 1953, for example.Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.0 -
Can I make a forecast: the EU will collapse long before Schengen.0
-
Mr. 63, I agree. Important to separate the feeling towards an individual monarch from the feeling towards the institute as a whole (in the same way, lots of people dislike a certain politician, but abolishing democracy would not be a good thing).0
-
I foresee a lot of attacks on Corbyn and Ukip from pb tories in the next week or so as Osborne's deficit plan unravels.
As one or two of us have been predicting for a while, once the euphoria of a majority dissipates this lot are not very good at governing.0 -
Jonathan
"It needed to be said. I am glad he said it."
You've woken up with a sore head this morning. I thought only Tories kicked people when they're down? He must have had a lousy six months.0 -
We did.SquareRoot said:
WE should have bought AWACS?? I think that's what they were called, much cheaper American and worked. They were still using Avro Shackletons IIRC long after they were beyond their sell by date.CarlottaVance said:
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
AWACS (airborne early warning) and maritime patrol (MP) are very different roles. AWACS are for detecting flying threats, whilst maritime patrol aircraft monitor shipping and submarines (or should do).
Generally, and there is some overlap: AWACS look for aircraft up and along, Maritime patrol look for ships down and along.
Historians of this area will know that the Nimrod-based AEW plane (AEW3) was another Nimrod-based project failure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_Nimrod_AEW3
In the end we did buy some Boeing Sentry (AWACS) planes, which are still doing good service. But they're not the same as maritime patrol planes.
First thoughts say it makes sense for AWACS and MP to be merged into one platform, especially as modern AWACS have look-down capability to search for low-flying sea-skimming planes and missiles. But MP requires the planes to fly at low altitude for sensors such as MAD. Therefore the MP planes need to have long range, long loiter times, at low altitude. Modern jet airliners give the first two; getting the third is where Boeing have apparently had trouble with developing the P8. I think the Yanks have abandoned MAD sensors for that reason, at least for their versions of the plane.0 -
Interesting and depressing article.AndyJS said:"Molenbeek broke my heart
A former resident reflects on his struggles with Brussels’ most notorious neighborhood.
By Teun Voeten"
http://www.politico.eu/article/molenbeek-broke-my-heart-radicalization-suburb-brussels-gentrification/
Yet again people shouted down as racist for raising uncomfortable facts.0 -
Well put sir, if this is a taste of what we have ahead I hope the Queen outlives Charles, she is impeccably behaved.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 63, I agree. Important to separate the feeling towards an individual monarch from the feeling towards the institute as a whole (in the same way, lots of people dislike a certain politician, but abolishing democracy would not be a good thing).
0 -
Great insight. pb.com does this background stuff so well...JosiasJessop said:
We did.SquareRoot said:
WE should have bought AWACS?? I think that's what they were called, much cheaper American and worked. They were still using Avro Shackletons IIRC long after they were beyond their sell by date.CarlottaVance said:
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
AWACS (airborne early warning) and maritime patrol (MP) are very different roles. AWACS are for detecting flying threats, whilst maritime patrol aircraft monitor shipping and submarines (or should do).
Generally, and there is some overlap: AWACS look for aircraft up and along, Maritime patrol look for ships down and along.
Historians of this area will know that the Nimrod-based AEW plane (AEW3) was another Nimrod-based project failure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_Nimrod_AEW3
In the end we did buy some Boeing Sentry (AWACS) planes, which are still doing good service. But they're not the same as maritime patrol planes.
First thoughts say it makes sense for AWACS and MP to be merged into one platform, especially as modern AWACS have look-down capability to search for low-flying sea-skimming planes and missiles. But MP requires the planes to fly at low altitude for sensors such as MAD. Therefore the MP planes need to have long range, long loiter times, at low altitude. Modern jet airliners give the first two; getting the third is where Boeing have apparently had trouble with developing the P8. I think the Yanks have abandoned MAD sensors for that reason, at least for their versions of the plane.0 -
WE did ... eventually.. I seem to recall news reports about deliberations on this subject and the requirement to buy British overrode the need..JosiasJessop said:
We did.SquareRoot said:
WE should have bought AWACS?? I think that's what they were called, much cheaper American and worked. They were still using Avro Shackletons IIRC long after they were beyond their sell by date.CarlottaVance said:
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
AWACS (airborne early warning) and maritime patrol (MP) are very different roles. AWACS are for detecting flying threats, whilst maritime patrol aircraft monitor shipping and submarines (or should do).
Generally, and there is some overlap: AWACS look for aircraft up and along, Maritime patrol look for ships down and along.
Historians of this area will know that the Nimrod-based AEW plane (AEW3) was another Nimrod-based project failure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_Nimrod_AEW3
In the end we did buy some Boeing Sentry (AWACS) planes, which are still doing good service. But they're not the same as maritime patrol planes.
First thoughts say it makes sense for AWACS and MP to be merged into one platform, especially as modern AWACS have look-down capability to search for low-flying sea-skimming planes and missiles. But MP requires the planes to fly at low altitude for sensors such as MAD. Therefore the MP planes need to have long range, long loiter times, at low altitude. Modern jet airliners give the first two; getting the third is where Boeing have apparently had trouble with developing the P8. I think the Yanks have abandoned MAD sensors for that reason, at least for their versions of the plane.0 -
To further this:viewcode said:
Weirdly, I agreed with the Government on this one. The upgraded Nimrods used the same airframes as the original Nimrods, which used the original airframes from the old Comet 4s, and they were way past the point where you could do anything with them. The airframes were built in the 1950s and production techniques weren't as consistent then, so you'd build a part for one airframe then discover that it wouldn't fit another because the measurements differed slightly from one plane to another. Back then you'd make the pieces fit with a big hammer but you can't do that with composite nor small pieces. When you combine that with the s***** way we build defence stuff (see FRES for an example), you ended up with a tin money pit. Although I object to them being cut up (WE HAVE MUSEUMS!), killing the program dead wasn't a bad thing to do.Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
The new Nimrod MRA4 required longer wings, so the MOD leant BAE an airframe. BAE then designed and built the wing sections that would be added to the wing roots. They made the segments for all the planes so the planes could be converted quickly.
Then the MOD delivered another plane.
The bits did not fit. In fact, they were inches out. Therefore all the extensions made had to be scrapped, and new ones made for each airframe as it came in, which took ages.
As an aside, to show how things have changed: when assembling the Typhoon, accuracy is so important for the airframe that they have to be built on a special concrete pad with no joins, as joins might mean the concrete sections expand at different rates, throwing out measurements by fractions of a milimetre.
(From memory, might be wrong).0 -
hugely skewed interview with BBC guy (correspondent? journalist? schill? PR man?) on Today, saying how cataclysmic govt intervention in the BBC is. No alternative view whatsoever.AlastairMeeks said:Licence fee negotiations are made with the input of licence fee payers. They're called general elections.
0 -
Just a shame it's of no help in figuring out which political punts to go forMarqueeMark said:
Great insight. pb.com does this background stuff so well...JosiasJessop said:
We did.SquareRoot said:
WE should have bought AWACS?? I think that's what they were called, much cheaper American and worked. They were still using Avro Shackletons IIRC long after they were beyond their sell by date.CarlottaVance said:
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
AWACS (airborne early warning) and maritime patrol (MP) are very different roles. AWACS are for detecting flying threats, whilst maritime patrol aircraft monitor shipping and submarines (or should do).
Generally, and there is some overlap: AWACS look for aircraft up and along, Maritime patrol look for ships down and along.
Historians of this area will know that the Nimrod-based AEW plane (AEW3) was another Nimrod-based project failure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_Nimrod_AEW3
In the end we did buy some Boeing Sentry (AWACS) planes, which are still doing good service. But they're not the same as maritime patrol planes.
First thoughts say it makes sense for AWACS and MP to be merged into one platform, especially as modern AWACS have look-down capability to search for low-flying sea-skimming planes and missiles. But MP requires the planes to fly at low altitude for sensors such as MAD. Therefore the MP planes need to have long range, long loiter times, at low altitude. Modern jet airliners give the first two; getting the third is where Boeing have apparently had trouble with developing the P8. I think the Yanks have abandoned MAD sensors for that reason, at least for their versions of the plane.
0 -
Sure. But there are more important and urgent problems than Ed's feelings. We've had more than five years nursing his ego, bruised or otherwise.Roger said:Jonathan
"It needed to be said. I am glad he said it."
You've woken up with a sore head this morning. I thought only Tories kicked people when they're down? He must have had a lousy six months time.
The Labour party is at serious risk today. We are looking down the barrel of long-term Tory governments. That would be a tragedy.
As the previous leader and as someone who managed to keep the party together, Ed is an unique position to fix the problems that he has created. He has rare reach across groups. He needs to wake up and get on with it. Perhaps using the sympathy we all have to positive effect.
The first step is for him to recognise and take responsibility for what he did. He still has something to offer. We don't have time to feel sorry for him.0 -
Not many governments have ever had to decrease spending. Brown did it for two years and then splurged, and Healey did it with the IMF insisting.blackburn63 said:I foresee a lot of attacks on Corbyn and Ukip from pb tories in the next week or so as Osborne's deficit plan unravels.
As one or two of us have been predicting for a while, once the euphoria of a majority dissipates this lot are not very good at governing.
What Osborne has achieved so far has been colossal. The criticism levelled is that he hasnt gone far enough quickly enough.
Odd, because that wasnt the criticism before....0 -
It is to all intents and purposes impossible to seal land borders in densely populated areas without significant geographical features.MarqueeMark said:
And see how safe Belgium is as a result... A drop-in centre for Jihadis.rcs1000 said:
Schengen just codified what has been the case in Europe for most of the past war period. The Benelux countries abolished border controls in 1953, for example.Tim_B said:So we now know that 2 of the Paris attackers landed on the Greek island of Leros and found their way to Paris without being detected.
To any sane person, that should spell the end of Schengen.
But watching Dateline London this morning, (why is Polly Toynbee or some other Grauniad reporter always on it?), three correspondents were discussing the Schengen problem rationally, but the French reporter (usually lucid, fact based and rational) was levitating with anger, almost as if someone were inserting half a raw onion in his rectum, and saying that Schengen's abolition was unthinkable. When asked why, all he could come up with is that "It's part of the European ideal."
That's not even an argument, just an almost blind religious commitment and fervor to the EU 'ideal'. I'd like to stuff an entire raw onion up his rectum. Maybe a couple.
It's nonsense like this that makes me dislike the EU.
You think Luxembourg, with 600,000 people, could sensibly guard its borders? Of course not.
You can ski between Switzerland and Italy (and I've done so). Do you think the Italian and Swiss governments are going to spend tens of billions on building walls across the Alps?
We are lucky, we live on an island. We have different choices.0 -
I've just looked it up. The first Sentry was delivered to the RAF in 1990. The Nimrod AEW3 project was cancelled in 1986, and the Sentry ordered for the RAF the same year. So it looks as if the delays were delivery delays, rather than delays in making a choice of alternative.SquareRoot said:
WE did ... eventually.. I seem to recall news reports about deliberations on this subject and the requirement to buy British overrode the need..JosiasJessop said:
We did.SquareRoot said:
WE should have bought AWACS?? I think that's what they were called, much cheaper American and worked. They were still using Avro Shackletons IIRC long after they were beyond their sell by date.CarlottaVance said:
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
AWACS (airborne early warning) and maritime patrol (MP) are very different roles. AWACS are for detecting flying threats, whilst maritime patrol aircraft monitor shipping and submarines (or should do).
Generally, and there is some overlap: AWACS look for aircraft up and along, Maritime patrol look for ships down and along.
Historians of this area will know that the Nimrod-based AEW plane (AEW3) was another Nimrod-based project failure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_Nimrod_AEW3
In the end we did buy some Boeing Sentry (AWACS) planes, which are still doing good service. But they're not the same as maritime patrol planes.
First thoughts say it makes sense for AWACS and MP to be merged into one platform, especially as modern AWACS have look-down capability to search for low-flying sea-skimming planes and missiles. But MP requires the planes to fly at low altitude for sensors such as MAD. Therefore the MP planes need to have long range, long loiter times, at low altitude. Modern jet airliners give the first two; getting the third is where Boeing have apparently had trouble with developing the P8. I think the Yanks have abandoned MAD sensors for that reason, at least for their versions of the plane.0 -
I like the French St Malo. Excellent aquarium there and a walk around the old city wals is excellent too.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Oh, I expect it be the St Malo in BritannyTim_B said:
St Malo is a sub-division on McGinnis Ferry Rd in Duluth, GA. I hear rumors of another named after it in FranceSunil_Prasannan said:
"Las Malvinas" derives from the French "Les Malouines", referring to "from St. Malo".Tim_B said:
Translation - he's not going to get any economic aid or business from the UK if Las Malvinas remains an issue.HYUFD said:
Yes also good news for the Falklands as he wants a more amicable relationship with the UKTim_B said:
The Kirchner woman is horrid, so it looks like good newsHYUFD said:The centre-right candidate Mauricio Macri leads on 54% to the 46% of Kirchner's preferred candidate, Daniel Scioli, with about half of votes counted in the final round of the Argentine presidential election
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-34896847
Lovely old tea shop with a roaring fire last time I was there.0 -
Why the Today programme (and I am a huge fan, both of Naughtie and Humphreys, and the others) should decide on behalf of the nation that Ed is or was not a decent politician who was trying to do the best for his country I have no idea.Roger said:Jonathan
"It needed to be said. I am glad he said it."
You've woken up with a sore head this morning. I thought only Tories kicked people when they're down? He must have had a lousy six months.0 -
It's not as barking as it sounds. Climate change has been fingered for being the root cause of conflict and mass migration throughout history. Eg, the end of the Roman Empire and the Migration Period. But in this case I don't think there is any evidence of that.blackburn63 said:I see Prince Charles is saying climate change is to blame for the refugee crisis. As a monarchist much more of this I'll become a Republican.
0 -
Mr. 1000, you also cannot prevent murder by making it illegal.
Policing borders wouldn't stop illegal migration entirely, but it would make it much harder to achieve. Similarly, Merkel's idiotic pronouncement only spurred on the flow of migrants.0 -
in reply to JJ
Sorry my fault , talking about different things. My memory tells me that the Shackeltons were continued in service long after their sell by date because of problems with NImrod..., there were talks about buying American AWACS, but we persisted against all logic with NImrod... but then eventually bought AWACS.. I am no expert (on anything ) but carrying on with NImrod cost zillions that we need not have spent..
Historians of this area will know that the Nimrod-based AEW plane (AEW3) was another Nimrod-based project failure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_Nimrod_AEW3
In the end we did buy some Boeing Sentry (AWACS) planes, which are still doing good service. But they're not the same as maritime patrol planes.
First thoughts say it makes sense for AWACS and MP to be merged into one platform, especially as modern AWACS have look-down capability to search for low-flying sea-skimming planes and missiles. But MP requires the planes to fly at low altitude for sensors such as MAD. Therefore the MP planes need to have long range, long loiter times, at low altitude. Modern jet airliners give the first two; getting the third is where Boeing have apparently had trouble with developing the P8. I think the Yanks have abandoned MAD sensors for that reason, at least for their versions of the plane.
WE did ... eventually.. I seem to recall news reports about deliberations on this subject and the requirement to buy British overrode the need..
I've just looked it up. The first Sentry was delivered to the RAF in 1990. The Nimrod AEW3 project was cancelled in 1986, and the Sentry ordered for the RAF the same year. So it looks as if the delays were delivery delays, rather than delays in making a choice of alternative.
0 -
Having been an in-waverer I am not a million miles now from being an out-waverer but I totally get why Schengen should stay. It is a principle and part of what makes the EU the EU. If you like that community of nations/ever closer union, even, it makes perfect sense.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, you also cannot prevent murder by making it illegal.
Policing borders wouldn't stop illegal migration entirely, but it would make it much harder to achieve. Similarly, Merkel's idiotic pronouncement only spurred on the flow of migrants.
And be absolutely clear coming in from Syria via Greece is not the only way for a jihadi to end up on Brussels. Or Paris.0 -
I dont eat it myself. It is only 'unhealthy' because we live in what is essentially a utopia for food. Whatever we want, we can get it. Ordinarily, at any other point in the history of mankind, a meal consisting of bread, meat, cheese, fatty soaked carbs, a few vegetables and a sweet high energy drink would probably be the nutritious thing you would eat for a month.SquareRoot said:
all fast food strikes me as unhealthy, I haven't eaten a maacy d or a burger king for years.. I would rather go hungry.notme said:
There are very very few 'unhealthy foods'.Chris_A said:
It's not. It's the treating of it that's expensive.AndyJS said:Why is it expensive to prevent diabetes? The answer is for people to stop eating unhealthy food, advice that costs nothing.
Chris_A said:
Well it's the Economist's graph. The answer is probably in the second sentence. We need more staff and we have to stop people becoming unwell in the first place. Treating easily preventable illness - diabetes, hypertension, obesity etc is expensive.Philip_Thompson said:
Despite less state funding as your graph shows. Why is that and what lessons can we learn from them?Chris_A said:
Includes countries such as Chile, Mexico, Turkey.glw said:
Yeah we spend more than the OECD average, and more the Spain and Italy which as far as I know have decent healthcare. To my eyes the thing that stands out is that our private sector is relatively small, perhaps we need to expand that alongside some rationing of less essential NHS services to encourage people to go private.RobD said:I'm not sure that the chart shows why the Doctors are striking.
Spain and Italy do do better than us for life expectancy. Both have far more doctors per capita than us.
Advice and education is cheaper but budgets are being cut, and the Tories leap up and down screaming "nanny state" at any meaningful health initiatives re tax on unhealthy food, or unhealthy lifestyle choices.
It is only considered unhealthy because we gorge on so many other things.0 -
It's not just the military. If you build planes in sections in different factories, and build them out of composite, then when you put part A and part B together, a difference of a few inches is a real problem: you can't just bodge them together, things like carbon fibre aren't malleable, you hit them with a big hammer they don't bend, they crack. They're used to this phenomenon now, but in the late 90's/early noughties there as a lot of headscratching and many rude words were said.JosiasJessop said:
To further this:viewcode said:
Weirdly, I agreed with the Government on this one. The upgraded Nimrods used the same airframes as the original Nimrods, which used the original airframes from the old Comet 4s, and they were way past the point where you could do anything with them. The airframes were built in the 1950s and production techniques weren't as consistent then, so you'd build a part for one airframe then discover that it wouldn't fit another because the measurements differed slightly from one plane to another. Back then you'd make the pieces fit with a big hammer but you can't do that with composite nor small pieces. When you combine that with the s***** way we build defence stuff (see FRES for an example), you ended up with a tin money pit. Although I object to them being cut up (WE HAVE MUSEUMS!), killing the program dead wasn't a bad thing to do.Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
The new Nimrod MRA4 required longer wings, so the MOD leant BAE an airframe. BAE then designed and built the wing sections that would be added to the wing roots. They made the segments for all the planes so the planes could be converted quickly.
Then the MOD delivered another plane.
The bits did not fit. In fact, they were inches out. Therefore all the extensions made had to be scrapped, and new ones made for each airframe as it came in, which took ages.
As an aside, to show how things have changed: when assembling the Typhoon, accuracy is so important for the airframe that they have to be built on a special concrete pad with no joins, as joins might mean the concrete sections expand at different rates, throwing out measurements by fractions of a milimetre.
(From memory, might be wrong).0 -
Fat is an elixir of life. It is the perfect medium for storing energy. Just because the land of plenty allows us more than we need.Tim_B said:
But there are plenty that are high in sodium, in calories, in fat - or all three.notme said:
There are very very few 'unhealthy foods'.Chris_A said:
It's not. It's the treating of it that's expensive.AndyJS said:Why is it expensive to prevent diabetes? The answer is for people to stop eating unhealthy food, advice that costs nothing.
Chris_A said:
Well it's the Economist's graph. The answer is probably in the second sentence. We need more staff and we have to stop people becoming unwell in the first place. Treating easily preventable illness - diabetes, hypertension, obesity etc is expensive.Philip_Thompson said:
Despite less state funding as your graph shows. Why is that and what lessons can we learn from them?Chris_A said:
Includes countries such as Chile, Mexico, Turkey.glw said:
Yeah we spend more than the OECD average, and more the Spain and Italy which as far as I know have decent healthcare. To my eyes the thing that stands out is that our private sector is relatively small, perhaps we need to expand that alongside some rationing of less essential NHS services to encourage people to go private.RobD said:I'm not sure that the chart shows why the Doctors are striking.
Spain and Italy do do better than us for life expectancy. Both have far more doctors per capita than us.
Advice and education is cheaper but budgets are being cut, and the Tories leap up and down screaming "nanny state" at any meaningful health initiatives re tax on unhealthy food, or unhealthy lifestyle choices.0 -
Right on cue.notme said:
Not many governments have ever had to decrease spending. Brown did it for two years and then splurged, and Healey did it with the IMF insisting.blackburn63 said:I foresee a lot of attacks on Corbyn and Ukip from pb tories in the next week or so as Osborne's deficit plan unravels.
As one or two of us have been predicting for a while, once the euphoria of a majority dissipates this lot are not very good at governing.
What Osborne has achieved so far has been colossal. The criticism levelled is that he hasnt gone far enough quickly enough.
Odd, because that wasnt the criticism before....
The front page of I offers an alternative view
0 -
Mr. Topping, not the only way indeed. But being one in a million (or three, as I believe the number now stands) is much easier when you're getting waved through and buses laid on.0
-
I think the criticism of the Prince of Wales is somewhat misplaced and his position more nuanced.
Prince Charles stated that the six year drought in Syria forced people off the land and into cities that accentuated the difficulties already present. A breeding ground for discontent was substantially heightened that helped to ferment the rebellion against Assad and the rise of ISIS.0 -
What about popcorn? There seems to be a lot of it being consumed by readers of this website these days.notme said:
Fat is an elixir of life. It is the perfect medium for storing energy. Just because the land of plenty allows us more than we need.Tim_B said:
But there are plenty that are high in sodium, in calories, in fat - or all three.notme said:
There are very very few 'unhealthy foods'.Chris_A said:
It's not. It's the treating of it that's expensive.AndyJS said:Why is it expensive to prevent diabetes? The answer is for people to stop eating unhealthy food, advice that costs nothing.
Chris_A said:
Well it's the Economist's graph. The answer is probably in the second sentence. We need more staff and we have to stop people becoming unwell in the first place. Treating easily preventable illness - diabetes, hypertension, obesity etc is expensive.Philip_Thompson said:
Despite less state funding as your graph shows. Why is that and what lessons can we learn from them?Chris_A said:
Includes countries such as Chile, Mexico, Turkey.glw said:
Yeah we spend more than the OECD average, and more the Spain and Italy which as far as I know have decent healthcare. To my eyes the thing that stands out is that our private sector is relatively small, perhaps we need to expand that alongside some rationing of less essential NHS services to encourage people to go private.RobD said:I'm not sure that the chart shows why the Doctors are striking.
Spain and Italy do do better than us for life expectancy. Both have far more doctors per capita than us.
Advice and education is cheaper but budgets are being cut, and the Tories leap up and down screaming "nanny state" at any meaningful health initiatives re tax on unhealthy food, or unhealthy lifestyle choices.0 -
@DAaronovitch: The @Ed_Miliband interview on @BBCr4today was profoundly depressing. 'I take full responsibility for getting everything right'. Oh Vanity.0
-
How much is Ed to blame for the current mess Labour find themselves in? A question for history perhaps, but personally I'd say a great deal.Scott_P said:@DAaronovitch: The @Ed_Miliband interview on @BBCr4today was profoundly depressing. 'I take full responsibility for getting everything right'. Oh Vanity.
0 -
Nimrods were getting old and dangerous. The RAF lost one in Afghanistan due to a massive fuel leak and subsequent explosion, and there was the increased risk of similar accident with another.CarlottaVance said:
New!?! The Comet first flew in 1949 and the Comet 4 - upon which Nimrod was based, in 1958......if BAE had to extensively rebuild them it was because no two were the same - when the project was cancelled there were doubts over whether it could ever safely fly.....Scott_P said:@BBCJamesCook: Five years after smashing up a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft, the UK government is to buy a fleet of new maritime patrol aircraft.
0 -
No it is a daft position. The Syrian Civil War has been a conflict completely contrived by outside powers. As the wikileaks document from the US Ambassador in 2006 confirms.JackW said:I think the criticism of the Prince of Wales is somewhat misplaced and his position more nuanced.
Prince Charles stated that the six year drought in Syria forced people off the land and into cities that accentuated the difficulties already present. A breeding ground for discontent was substantially heightened that helped to ferment the rebellion against Assad and the rise of ISIS.
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06DAMASCUS5399_a.html
http://ericmargolis.com/2015/07/destroying-syria-to-make-it-safe-for-american-values/
An estimated 250,000 have died in the Syrian Civil War, 40,000 of those have been foreign Salafists fighting for the rebels. I wish the Syrian people good luck in expelling these foreign invaders who have devastated their country. 100,000 Syrians have died fighting for their country, hopefully now that the SAA and allied government militias are making real progress the slaughter will stop. Their needs to a reckoning for the KSA, Turkey, Qatar, Israel as well as reform of 'our' own government, it is a wicked and terrible thing we have done.0 -
F1: according to the BBC gossip page, the Renault-Lotus deal is practically concluded.
Not a surprise, but still good news, given the dire financial state of more than half the grid.0 -
I blame the EICIPM advocates.rottenborough said:
How much is Ed to blame for the current mess Labour find themselves in? A question for history perhaps, but personally I'd say a great deal.Scott_P said:@DAaronovitch: The @Ed_Miliband interview on @BBCr4today was profoundly depressing. 'I take full responsibility for getting everything right'. Oh Vanity.
OGH needs to urgently send out search parties for most of these miscreants as many seem to be AWOL from PB since 7th May.
0 -
Middling at best, sad to say. Things could have been much worse,but as I came to think around 2013/14, they are a bit crap in plenty of ways. Labour then were not well position to make the most of that though, and they seem less so now, unless the crapness is much worse and the people get angrier.blackburn63 said:I foresee a lot of attacks on Corbyn and Ukip from pb tories in the next week or so as Osborne's deficit plan unravels.
As one or two of us have been predicting for a while, once the euphoria of a majority dissipates this lot are not very good at governing.0 -
Otoh 'opportunistic little shit' Ed (© PB) prevented the UK from indulging in a doubtless tokenistic bombing of Assad, thus depriving the nation of the sight of a flushed Dave explaining why we bore no responsibility for the rise of ISIS. I'm sure PB Tories are suitably grateful.Jonathan said:
It needed to be said. I am glad he said it.0 -
Popcorn is a cinematic experience - the calories don't count.rottenborough said:
What about popcorn? There seems to be a lot of it being consumed by readers of this website these days.notme said:
Fat is an elixir of life. It is the perfect medium for storing energy. Just because the land of plenty allows us more than we need.Tim_B said:
But there are plenty that are high in sodium, in calories, in fat - or all three.notme said:
There are very very few 'unhealthy foods'.Chris_A said:
It's not. It's the treating of it that's expensive.AndyJS said:Why is it expensive to prevent diabetes? The answer is for people to stop eating unhealthy food, advice that costs nothing.
Chris_A said:
Well it's the Economist's graph. The answer is probably in the second sentence. We need more staff and we have to stop people becoming unwell in the first place. Treating easily preventable illness - diabetes, hypertension, obesity etc is expensive.Philip_Thompson said:
Despite less state funding as your graph shows. Why is that and what lessons can we learn from them?Chris_A said:
Includes countries such as Chile, Mexico, Turkey.glw said:
Yeah we spend more than the OECD average, and more the Spain and Italy which as far as I know have decent healthcare. To my eyes the thing that stands out is that our private sector is relatively small, perhaps we need to expand that alongside some rationing of less essential NHS services to encourage people to go private.RobD said:I'm not sure that the chart shows why the Doctors are striking.
Spain and Italy do do better than us for life expectancy. Both have far more doctors per capita than us.
Advice and education is cheaper but budgets are being cut, and the Tories leap up and down screaming "nanny state" at any meaningful health initiatives re tax on unhealthy food, or unhealthy lifestyle choices.0 -
Nuance seemed to have passed you by on the road to Damascus.LondonBob said:
No it is a daft position. The Syrian Civil War has been a conflict completely contrived by outside powers. As the wikileaks document from the US Ambassador in 2006 confirms.JackW said:I think the criticism of the Prince of Wales is somewhat misplaced and his position more nuanced.
Prince Charles stated that the six year drought in Syria forced people off the land and into cities that accentuated the difficulties already present. A breeding ground for discontent was substantially heightened that helped to ferment the rebellion against Assad and the rise of ISIS.
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06DAMASCUS5399_a.html
http://ericmargolis.com/2015/07/destroying-syria-to-make-it-safe-for-american-values/
An estimated 250,000 have died in the Syrian Civil War, 40,000 of those have been foreign Salafists fighting for the rebels. I wish the Syrian people good luck in expelling these foreign invaders who have devastated their country. 100,000 Syrians have died fighting for their country, hopefully now that the SAA and allied government militias are making real progress the slaughter will stop. Their needs to a reckoning for the KSA, Turkey, Qatar, Israel as well as reform of 'our' own government, it is a wicked and terrible thing we have done.
0 -
Philip Hammond comes across very well, but the conservatives are automatons, slavishly parroting the latest soundbite.kle4 said:
Middling at best, sad to say. Things could have been much worse,but as I came to think around 2013/14, they are a bit crap in plenty of ways. Labour then were not well position to make the most of that though, and they seem less so now, unless the crapness is much worse and the people get angrier.blackburn63 said:I foresee a lot of attacks on Corbyn and Ukip from pb tories in the next week or so as Osborne's deficit plan unravels.
As one or two of us have been predicting for a while, once the euphoria of a majority dissipates this lot are not very good at governing.
0 -
Mr. Divvie, or, if the UK had gotten involved, Obama may have as well, and the FSA (then still a fighting force) could have benefited.
Our involvement in 2013 could have been disastrous (ISIS could have all Syria by now) or hugely helpful (we could have the FSA in charge, or at least the major rival to ISIS, rather than Assad).0 -
It is the BBC's idea of balance. Truly shocking but which main broadcaster is going to hold the BBC to account?TOPPING said:
hugely skewed interview with BBC guy (correspondent? journalist? schill? PR man?) on Today, saying how cataclysmic govt intervention in the BBC is. No alternative view whatsoever.AlastairMeeks said:Licence fee negotiations are made with the input of licence fee payers. They're called general elections.
0 -
You have yet to learn that there is a difference between proposed actions and enacted actions.LondonBob said:
No it is a daft position. The Syrian Civil War has been a conflict completely contrived by outside powers. As the wikileaks document from the US Ambassador in 2006 confirms.JackW said:I think the criticism of the Prince of Wales is somewhat misplaced and his position more nuanced.
Prince Charles stated that the six year drought in Syria forced people off the land and into cities that accentuated the difficulties already present. A breeding ground for discontent was substantially heightened that helped to ferment the rebellion against Assad and the rise of ISIS.
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06DAMASCUS5399_a.html
http://ericmargolis.com/2015/07/destroying-syria-to-make-it-safe-for-american-values/
An estimated 250,000 have died in the Syrian Civil War, 40,000 of those have been foreign Salafists fighting for the rebels. I wish the Syrian people good luck in expelling these foreign invaders who have devastated their country. 100,000 Syrians have died fighting for their country, hopefully now that the SAA and allied government militias are making real progress the slaughter will stop. Their needs to a reckoning for the KSA, Turkey, Qatar, Israel as well as reform of 'our' own government, it is a wicked and terrible thing we have done.
The Syrian civil war came about because of protests, which can be seen as part of the Arab Spring, for more democracy and the release of political prisoners (*). In an unsurprising move Assad's forces opened fire on protesters.
As the regime's line hardened, so did the protesters, who expanded their aims to the overthrow of Assad.
You might want to take your tinfoil hat off and actually look at what went on instead of blindly supporting mass-murderer, chemical-weapons using, war criminal Assad.
(*) Who are very poorly treated by the regime:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/11/images-syrian-torture-shock-new-yorkers-united-nations0 -
Nuanced, now that's a word you don't hear much on PB.JackW said:I think the criticism of the Prince of Wales is somewhat misplaced and his position more nuanced.
Prince Charles stated that the six year drought in Syria forced people off the land and into cities that accentuated the difficulties already present. A breeding ground for discontent was substantially heightened that helped to ferment the rebellion against Assad and the rise of ISIS.
I tend to agree that there were a number of factors involved in creating the Syrian situation.0 -
Fair play to BJO, he has never shied away, unlike IOS and several others.JackW said:
I blame the EICIPM advocates.rottenborough said:
How much is Ed to blame for the current mess Labour find themselves in? A question for history perhaps, but personally I'd say a great deal.Scott_P said:@DAaronovitch: The @Ed_Miliband interview on @BBCr4today was profoundly depressing. 'I take full responsibility for getting everything right'. Oh Vanity.
OGH needs to urgently send out search parties for most of these miscreants as many seem to be AWOL from PB since 7th May.0
