In weirdly topical news, I've begun taking snaps of my coin collection (don't collect any more but a chance prize of a Bohemian silver denar reinvigorated my interest) and noted that I had a few half-pennies post-decimalisation ('77 and '82, I think). Brief Twitter chat revealed they were removed from circulation due to inflation.
It's the politics of being seen taking coppers off the street.....
A sincere bravo.
On the topic of Russia, I see a book out by Garry Kasparov about Putin is entitled 'Winter is Coming: Why Vladimir Putin and the Enemies of the Free World Must be Stopped'
Am I silly for thinking the first part of that title is, somehow, to capitalise on a popular phrase from Game of Thrones?
Is indignation really the right word for it? Our government believes it has sufficient evidence to suggest, at a minimum, Russian negligent culpability in a brazen attempted murder. Indignation seems pretty low level and inadvertently suggests what you rightly point out as a limited response as being almost unreasonable, due to us merely being indignant.
Yes, fences will be mended, just as they are when we have wars with people as well. There's stages to go through, unless one disputes the core facts as presented from our intelligence services though.
There seems a peculiar sharpness to the anger over this that I'm simply not getting or understanding.
There comes a point when we have to stop playing with the toy guns and soldiers and start living in the real world with the adults. Of course what has happened is reprehensible and has to be condemned and I get that, I really do.
The problem is what can you do that is effective (beyond political rhetoric) and meaningful. The best place to start is usually in the wallet area - seizing the assets of and making life as financially difficult for those directly implicated in this but who are they, where are they and where are their assets ? We could perhaps nobble Putin's pals who have big houses in Kensington but they are much cleverer than that so it would be a minor inconvenience at best.
The really hard bit is this - what has happened is terrible and there's a feeling we must "do something". The problem is no one really knows what an appropriate or proportionate "something" is so we vent our anger verbally and anyone who offers anything other than outrage is shouted down by the angry.
We are angry because we have been bullied and the bully is getting away with it. We want to fight back, to hit him where it hurts but we neither have the means nor arguably the will. He's a bully so do we burn his house down ? Hardly. Do we pat him on the shoulder and thank him ? Hardly. Perhaps cold indifference bordering on contempt is the response - that's not easy and in a charged political atmosphere not easy for a Prime Minister courting popularity. I do like her withdrawing Lavrov's invite - we should curtail all cultural, political and social contact beyond normal business and restrict that.
Turn our back, turn away - better than chasing down the street shouting and not landing a blow while he smirks at our powerlessness.
Labour MP tells @BethRigby they have zero confidence in Jeremy Corbyn over national security. In which case they have an obligation to resign the Labour-whip. National security is the primary responsibility of any government or opposition.
They need to mean what they say, and say what they mean then.
There comes a point when we have to stop playing with the toy guns and soldiers and start living in the real world with the adults. Of course what has happened is reprehensible and has to be condemned and I get that, I really do.
The really hard bit is this - what has happened is terrible and there's a feeling we must "do something". The problem is no one really knows what an appropriate or proportionate "something" is so we vent our anger verbally and anyone who offers anything other than outrage is shouted down by the angry.
We are angry because we have been bullied and the bully is getting away with it. We want to fight back, to hit him where it hurts but we neither have the means nor arguably the will. He's a bully so do we burn his house down ? Hardly. Do we pat him on the shoulder and thank him ? Hardly. Perhaps cold indifference bordering on contempt is the response - that's not easy and in a charged political atmosphere not easy for a Prime Minister courting popularity. I do like her withdrawing Lavrov's invite - we should curtail all cultural, political and social contact beyond normal business and restrict that.
Turn our back, turn away - better than chasing down the street shouting and not landing a blow while he smirks at our powerlessness.
Except the government has not overreacted yet, so the claim that people are getting attacked purely for objecting to it getting outraged are arguing as though we have undertaken extreme action, and that isn't the case. Have government ministers sought extreme escalation? Hardly. So how exactly are people being shouted down for offering something other than outrage? That would require something else to be offered
So it really looks like a lot of words to say 'There's only so much we can do, we aren't sure what we should do, therefore we should do nothing'.
We have offered little beyond words at this point. So when I see people lamenting being 'attacked' for not giving in to outrage what I see is when people desperately warn the public not to turn into a mindless mob after an event, before there's any evidence the public will do so. 'It is important not to overreact' is an important point to always keep in mind, but when it happens during an initial reaction, prior to anyone indicating they are overreacting, it comes across as dissembling.
I don't think it fair to imply anyone who is displaying some outrage is acting like a child. The expression of outrage, even if we can do nothing about it, is surely expected with an event like this. Nor does it follow that anyone suggesting not getting outraged, and nothing much else, is some paragon of adulthood.
Labour MP tells @BethRigby they have zero confidence in Jeremy Corbyn over national security. In which case they have an obligation to resign the Labour-whip. National security is the primary responsibility of any government or opposition.
They need to mean what they say, and say what they mean then.
Labour MP tells @BethRigby they have zero confidence in Jeremy Corbyn over national security. In which case they have an obligation to resign the Labour-whip. National security is the primary responsibility of any government or opposition.
They need to mean what they say, and say what they mean then.
And resign the whip. Hodges is right on this one
Nothing will happen.
They won't resign the whip. It will be a half hearted repeat of their previous antics. Deselection beckons, as Corbyn can now get the rules changed as he controls the NEC.
There seems a peculiar sharpness to the anger over this that I'm simply not getting or understanding.
There comes a point when we have to stop playing with the toy guns and soldiers and start living in the real world with the adults. Of course what has happened is reprehensible and has to be condemned and I get that, I really do.
The problem is what can you do that is effective (beyond political rhetoric) and meaningful. The best place to start is usually in the wallet area - seizing the assets of and making life as financially difficult for those directly implicated in this but who are they, where are they and where are their assets ? We could perhaps nobble Putin's pals who have big houses in Kensington but they are much cleverer than that so it would be a minor inconvenience at best.
The really hard bit is this - what has happened is terrible and there's a feeling we must "do something". The problem is no one really knows what an appropriate or proportionate "something" is so we vent our anger verbally and anyone who offers anything other than outrage is shouted down by the angry.
(Snip)
Turn our back, turn away - better than chasing down the street shouting and not landing a blow while he smirks at our powerlessness.
"The really hard bit is this - what has happened is terrible and there's a feeling we must "do something"."
The problem is, we must do something.
There are several reasons, but let us take one that is close to many people's hearts, and particularly those on the left: disarmament.
We have very strict laws and controls on NBC weapons. Nuclear has been less successful of the the three, but biological and chemical controls have generally worked well. The sad thing is that the world has ignored breaches, particularly in Iraq and Syria, and that has weakened the entire NBC structure. After Miliband's stupidity over Syria (and I can put it worse than that), there will be other regimes looking into developing and potentially using B&C weapons, because they know they can use them with impunity.
If you believe in disarmament, then you need to react appropriately when people breach treaties. And that involves 'punishment' of varying types. Otherwise calls for disarmament becomes pointless, stupid bleating.
Turning our backs will just tell Putin and others that they can develop such weapons, and even use them. And that's obviously bad for us and the world.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
Labour MP tells @BethRigby they have zero confidence in Jeremy Corbyn over national security. In which case they have an obligation to resign the Labour-whip. National security is the primary responsibility of any government or opposition.
They need to mean what they say, and say what they mean then.
And resign the whip. Hodges is right on this one
Nothing will happen.
They won't resign the whip. It will be a half hearted repeat of their previous antics. Deselection beckons, as Corbyn can now get the rules changed as he controls the NEC.
I don't think there'll be any deselections, I can imagine for instance Jess Philips being quite popular within her local party membership although she's obviously not a massive fan of Corbyn. I'd laugh if it happened though !
There are several reasons, but let us take one that is close to many people's hearts, and particularly those on the left: disarmament.
We have very strict laws and controls on NBC weapons. Nuclear has been less successful of the the three, but biological and chemical controls have generally worked well. The sad thing is that the world has ignored breaches, particularly in Iraq and Syria, and that has weakened the entire NBC structure. After Miliband's stupidity over Syria (and I can put it worse than that), there will be other regimes looking into developing and potentially using B&C weapons, because they know they can use them with impunity.
If you believe in disarmament, then you need to react appropriately when people breach treaties. And that involves 'punishment' of varying types. Otherwise calls for disarmament becomes pointless, stupid bleating.
Turning our backs will just tell Putin and others that they can develop such weapons, and even use them. And that's obviously bad for us and the world.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
Fine words but what is the "appropriate" response ? What was it in Syria for example ? What was it when Saddam gassed the Kurds back in the 80s ?
How do we "punish" Russia ? Diplomatically, economically, culturally - yes, fine, but how effective would any of that really be ? Militarily - okay, what, how, when, where and how do you prevent escalation ?
This is the difficult stuff - the stuff that should keep politicians and political people awake at night. I've yet to hear of any response from anyone that is neither wholly over-the-top nor wholly ineffective.
There are several reasons, but let us take one that is close to many people's hearts, and particularly those on the left: disarmament.
We have very strict laws and controls on NBC weapons. Nuclear has been less successful of the the three, but biological and chemical controls have generally worked well. The sad thing is that the world has ignored breaches, particularly in Iraq and Syria, and that has weakened the entire NBC structure. After Miliband's stupidity over Syria (and I can put it worse than that), there will be other regimes looking into developing and potentially using B&C weapons, because they know they can use them with impunity.
If you believe in disarmament, then you need to react appropriately when people breach treaties. And that involves 'punishment' of varying types. Otherwise calls for disarmament becomes pointless, stupid bleating.
Turning our backs will just tell Putin and others that they can develop such weapons, and even use them. And that's obviously bad for us and the world.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
Fine words but what is the "appropriate" response ? What was it in Syria for example ? What was it when Saddam gassed the Kurds back in the 80s ?
How do we "punish" Russia ? Diplomatically, economically, culturally - yes, fine, but how effective would any of that really be ? Militarily - okay, what, how, when, where and how do you prevent escalation ?
This is the difficult stuff - the stuff that should keep politicians and political people awake at night. I've yet to hear of any response from anyone that is neither wholly over-the-top nor wholly ineffective.
The correct response is up to both individual nations and the community of nations.
It is the difficult stuff - and it is particularly difficult when we public plebs can't see all the possible reactions: i.e. stuff may go on behind the scenes.
Personally, I'll give he same response as I gave when people gave similar Quisling arguments over Syria. The response has to be appropriate to negate any advantage the use of the weapons gave them. In the case of Syria, that'd be denying Assad territory or harming his forces to that level. In this case, to damage Russia's ability to perform intelligence operations and to harm them financially.
Your reaction is to do nothing, and I fear you would see every possible reaction as either over-the-top or wholly ineffective. Worse, your reaction will just lead to other B&C attacks.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
It is perhaps worth reminding everyone at this point that while Corbyn's emotional intelligence makes him a formidable opponent in a straight campaign - look at the way he twists all his audiences into sympathy even when he is either blatantly lying to them, demonising his opponents with a vitriol unmatched since Gladstone on Disraeli, or both - he is in fact really rather stupid. He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
It is perhaps worth reminding everyone at this point that while Corbyn's emotional intelligence makes him a formidable opponent in a straight campaign - look at the way he twists all his audiences into sympathy even when he is either blatantly lying to them, demonising his opponents with a vitriol unmatched since Gladstone on Disraeli, or both - he is in fact really rather stupid. He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do he wrong thing.
42% of the public want him to be PM. That's the situation.
There are several reasons, but let us take one that is close to many people's hearts, and particularly those on the left: disarmament.
We have very strict laws and controls on NBC weapons. Nuclear has been less successful of the the three, but biological and chemical controls have generally worked well. The sad thing is that the world has ignored breaches, particularly in Iraq and Syria, and that has weakened the entire NBC structure. After Miliband's stupidity over Syria (and I can put it worse than that), there will be other regimes looking into developing and potentially using B&C weapons, because they know they can use them with impunity.
If you believe in disarmament, then you need to react appropriately when people breach treaties. And that involves 'punishment' of varying types. Otherwise calls for disarmament becomes pointless, stupid bleating.
Turning our backs will just tell Putin and others that they can develop such weapons, and even use them. And that's obviously bad for us and the world.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
Fine words but what is the "appropriate" response ? What was it in Syria for example ? What was it when Saddam gassed the Kurds back in the 80s ?
How do we "punish" Russia ? Diplomatically, economically, culturally - yes, fine, but how effective would any of that really be? Militarily - okay, what, how, when, where and how do you prevent escalation ?
This is the difficult stuff - the stuff that should keep politicians and political people awake at night. I've yet to hear of any response from anyone that is neither wholly over-the-top nor wholly ineffective.
Very, if - and only if - we take international opinion with us; which is why this is very heartening
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
It is perhaps worth reminding everyone at this point that while Corbyn's emotional intelligence makes him a formidable opponent in a straight campaign - look at the way he twists all his audiences into sympathy even when he is either blatantly lying to them, demonising his opponents with a vitriol unmatched since Gladstone on Disraeli, or both - he is in fact really rather stupid. He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do he wrong thing.
42% of the public want him to be PM. That's the situation.
Like I said. Emotional intelligence. He has it. May doesn't.
The real irony of course is that the two world leaders he most resembles in that regard from the recent past are a certain Tony Blair and an even more certain Donald Trump. Corbyn is the ultimate triumph of spin over substance - for at least Blair whatever his faults (which were many) had substance. I sometimes think he's not the break from New Labour but the fulfilment of it.
I would just like to point out to CCHQ that I am acting as Felix's agent in this matter and Felix will require a fee before you start using on your literature ;-)
There are several reasons, but let us take one that is close to many people's hearts, and particularly those on the left: disarmament.
We have very strict laws and controls on NBC weapons. Nuclear has been less successful of the the three, but biological and chemical controls have generally worked well. The sad thing is that the world has ignored breaches, particularly in Iraq and Syria, and that has weakened the entire NBC structure. After Miliband's stupidity over Syria (and I can put it worse than that), there will be other regimes looking into developing and potentially using B&C weapons, because they know they can use them with impunity.
If you believe in disarmament, then you need to react appropriately when people breach treaties. And that involves 'punishment' of varying types. Otherwise calls for disarmament becomes pointless, stupid bleating.
Turning our backs will just tell Putin and others that they can develop such weapons, and even use them. And that's obviously bad for us and the world.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
Fine words but what is the "appropriate" response ? What was it in Syria for example ? What was it when Saddam gassed the Kurds back in the 80s ?
How do we "punish" Russia ? Diplomatically, economically, culturally - yes, fine, but how effective would any of that really be? Militarily - okay, what, how, when, where and how do you prevent escalation ?
This is the difficult stuff - the stuff that should keep politicians and political people awake at night. I've yet to hear of any response from anyone that is neither wholly over-the-top nor wholly ineffective.
Very, if - and only if - we take international opinion with us; which is why this is very heartening
I think that there is more we could do on our own. For example we could seize the assets in the U.K. of all oligarchs that are linked to the Kremlin and invite them to prove that they came by these assets legitimately and not using the proceeds of crime.
We should exclude all such oligarchs from this country as well as their families. We are dealing with a mafiosi style bunch of crooks and thugs. We should stop pretending that we are dealing with anything other than a failed state. Normal diplomatic relations are simply not applicable.
There seems a peculiar sharpness to the anger over this that I'm simply not getting or understanding.
There comes a point when we have to stop playing with the toy guns and soldiers and start living in the real world with the adults. Of course what has happened is reprehensible and has to be condemned and I get that, I really do.
The problem is what can you do that is effective (beyond political rhetoric) and meaningful. The best place to start is usually in the wallet area - seizing the assets of and making life as financially difficult for those directly implicated in this but who are they, where are they and where are their assets ? We could perhaps nobble Putin's pals who have big houses in Kensington but they are much cleverer than that so it would be a minor inconvenience at best.
The really hard bit is this - what has happened is terrible and there's a feeling we must "do something". The problem is no one really knows what an appropriate or proportionate "something" is so we vent our anger verbally and anyone who offers anything other than outrage is shouted down by the angry.
(Snip)
Turn our back, turn away - better than chasing down the street shouting and not landing a blow while he smirks at our powerlessness.
"The really hard bit is this - what has happened is terrible and there's a feeling we must "do something"."
The problem is, we must do something.
There are several reasons, but let us take one that is close to many people's hearts, and particularly those on the left: disarmament.
We have very strict laws and controls on NBC weapons. Nuclear has been less successful of the the three, but biological and chemical controls have generally worked well. The sad thing is that the world has ignored breaches, particularly in Iraq and Syria, and that has weakened the entire NBC structure. After Miliband's stupidity over Syria (and I can put it worse than that), there will be other regimes looking into developing and potentially using B&C weapons, because they know they can use them with impunity.
If you believe in disarmament, then you need to react appropriately when people breach treaties. And that involves 'punishment' of varying types. Otherwise calls for disarmament becomes pointless, stupid bleating.
Turning our backs will just tell Putin and others that they can develop such weapons, and even use them. And that's obviously bad for us and the world.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
That’s a good point.
Miliband’s schoolboy politics over Syria in 2013 very probably had a direct bearing on the terrible events in Salisbury.
A fairly predictable and limited response from the Prime Minister. We'll go to the World Cup even if Prince William doesn't and I suspect most people will watch it and cheer England on as much as ever. Presumably if it's a Russia vs Germany final we'll all have to find something else to do.
It's perfectly reasonable to argue defence resources could be better spent on the NCSC than on additional nuclear missiles if it's our belief a cyber attack is more probable than a nuclear attack. I also suspect Russian systems are as vulnerable as those of the West to cyber attack and we have the capability but don't show it off.
As for Labour, Corbyn is at least consistent for all most people think he's wrong. At some point (perhaps when we go looking for a favourable trade deal), we'll need to mend fences with Moscow once the memory and the indignation fades.
Not sure about the World Cup. Stephen Kinnock has asked for a widescale boycott and Germany's leading paper is saying Germany should not take part.
Lots more to come on this over the next weeks and months
A fairly predictable and limited response from the Prime Minister. We'll go to the World Cup even if Prince William doesn't and I suspect most people will watch it and cheer England on as much as ever. Presumably if it's a Russia vs Germany final we'll all have to find something else to do.
It's perfectly reasonable to argue defence resources could be better spent on the NCSC than on additional nuclear missiles if it's our belief a cyber attack is more probable than a nuclear attack. I also suspect Russian systems are as vulnerable as those of the West to cyber attack and we have the capability but don't show it off.
As for Labour, Corbyn is at least consistent for all most people think he's wrong. At some point (perhaps when we go looking for a favourable trade deal), we'll need to mend fences with Moscow once the memory and the indignation fades.
Not sure about the World Cup. Stephen Kinnock has asked for a widescale boycott and Germany's leading paper is saying Germany should not take part.
Lots more to come on this over the next weeks and months
England head coach Eddie Jones has "apologised unreservedly" for offensive comments he made about Wales and Ireland.
At a sponsors' talk in July 2017, the Australian described Wales as a "shit little place" and spoke about how disappointed he was by a recent defeat by the "scummy Irish".
Jones, 58, said he was "very sorry for any offence caused" and added: "No excuses. I shouldn't have said what I did."
Miliband’s schoolboy politics over Syria in 2013 very probably had a direct bearing on the terrible events in Salisbury.
Whilst I will forever hold Ed Miliband in contempt for that, let us not forget the 30 Tory MPs that rebelled.
It is why I'm not as keen as many one nation Tories about Sarah Wollaston.
That David Davis was opposing the government should have been a sign to the likes of her.
Although if Miliband hadn’t acted as he did (promised opposition support and the reneged at the last moment) the approach the Government would have taken to pursuade instinctive opponents might have been different and/or the vote would have been delayed until more were brought on board. Once the vote was called and lost, they couldn’t come back and try again.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
It is perhaps worth reminding everyone at this point that while Corbyn's emotional intelligence makes him a formidable opponent in a straight campaign - look at the way he twists all his audiences into sympathy even when he is either blatantly lying to them, demonising his opponents with a vitriol unmatched since Gladstone on Disraeli, or both - he is in fact really rather stupid. He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.
I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
It is perhaps worth reminding everyone at this point that while Corbyn's emotional intelligence makes him a formidable opponent in a straight campaign - look at the way he twists all his audiences into sympathy even when he is either blatantly lying to them, demonising his opponents with a vitriol unmatched since Gladstone on Disraeli, or both - he is in fact really rather stupid. He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.
I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.
This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong.
He did somewhat better than expected in one general election campaign. This was achieved by making promises he had not thought through that he knew he would not need to honour in any case.
On what other occasion has he either made smart judgements or indeed proved anyone wrong? Even where he has been proven to be right over events - as in Iraq - it's hard to avoid the conclusion that he was doing it for the wrong reasons and that the result was pure coincidence.
Overestimating an opponent is just as dangerous as underestimating one. Last year most of us including me were guilty of the latter. Now everyone is guilty of the former. He is demonstrating over this situation all the qualities that took him to 20% in the polls - in abundance.
That's not to say he's incapable of winning the next election albeit it is in my judgement unlikely. However, if he became PM it's hard to see how he could last very long.
I’m not sure that Corbyn has any sort of “strategy” as such he’s just saying what he thinks. He probably thinks he’s adopting a cautious/reasonable stance vs May sabre-rattling, the flaw in this is that May IS actually adopting the cautious/reasonable stance already. She’s been careful I think to describe Russia as “culpable” for the attack as opposed to directly responsible which gives Russia adequate opportunity to explain why they are not the latter. And if Russia refuse to engage with this olive branch then really there is only one conclusion that can be drawn.
'Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord; He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored; He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword: His truth is marching on.'
"If we don’t take immediate, concrete measures to address this now, Salisbury will not be the last place we see chemical weapons used ... This is a defining moment."
This is exactly the point, and something Corbyn and his fellow travellers are ignoring.
The correct response is up to both individual nations and the community of nations.
It is the difficult stuff - and it is particularly difficult when we public plebs can't see all the possible reactions: i.e. stuff may go on behind the scenes.
Personally, I'll give he same response as I gave when people gave similar Quisling arguments over Syria. The response has to be appropriate to negate any advantage the use of the weapons gave them. In the case of Syria, that'd be denying Assad territory or harming his forces to that level. In this case, to damage Russia's ability to perform intelligence operations and to harm them financially.
Your reaction is to do nothing, and I fear you would see every possible reaction as either over-the-top or wholly ineffective. Worse, your reaction will just lead to other B&C attacks.
I think you misrepresent my position. I'm not opposing doing something but I'm pointing out that most of the "somethings" being proposed are more to make us feel better about ourselves, that we are doing something, rather than because they have any meaningful impact or will change Putin's mind in any way.
I also said in my earlier that the best way to hit Putin was in the wallet - as DavidL pointed out the other day, the Russian economy is the same size as Spain's and, I suspect, much of the wealth is concentrated in very few hands. Going after the oligarchic and kleptocratic friends of Putin and especially their British assets and holdings would seem the most sensible move as the complaints about it would go straight to Vladimir P himself.
To make it hurt we may however have to take an economic hit ourselves - "no pain no gain" as they say - in the London luxury market but I'm sure we'll survive.
The other aspect is the one you mention - working with other nations to counteract Russian intelligence and restrict Russian financial activities. At the moment, we have plenty of vocal support - let's say if that translates into anything meaningful from the EU or the US or whether it will be all rhetoric and no substance.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.
I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.
This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
We will see where it leads, but I don't see any outrage. No one on my social media accounts has commented on it. The reaction is nothing compared to a terrorist attack. Its seen as a mafia killing. That is also how much of the rest of the world see it.
I'm not at all trying to downplay the seriousness of the incident for the people involved, I am trying to assess the fallout. I think that there will be no significant international condemnation of Russia, I think it will be a national embarrassment for us, and I think it will play in to Corbyns hands. Of course, I hope I am wrong.
I would just like to point out to CCHQ that I am acting as Felix's agent in this matter and Felix will require a fee before you start using on your literature ;-)
As a true Tory thru and thru my services require neither fee nor honours!
Is it time to remind everyone of my tip that she's still value as the next Potus?
It still wasn't the best speech I've ever seen at the SC though. That was - again - about Russian gangsterism and made in an extraordinary three languages:
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
"Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage." I am always a bit baffled to hear that sort of thing from dim lefties (no offence!), because it comes down to nostalgia for the days of empire and colonies and stuff, which I thought was meant to be a vice of the right? And last time it happened, cutting a figure turned out to mean being at the head of the queue to fellate the POTUS and get stuck in to some serious brownie murdering with him. Were you happy with that? We aren't post-Brexit, incidentally, and anyway Germany seems happy to stand up and be counted with us, and surely even you don't believe that Trump is in some way this country's fault?
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.
I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.
This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
We will see where it leads, but I don't see any outrage. No one on my social media accounts has commented on it. The reaction is nothing compared to a terrorist attack. Its seen as a mafia killing. That is also how much of the rest of the world see it.
I'm not at all trying to downplay the seriousness of the incident for the people involved, I am trying to assess the fallout. I think that there will be no significant international condemnation of Russia, I think it will be a national embarrassment for us, and I think it will play in to Corbyns hands. Of course, I hope I am wrong.
You have a very chilled circle of social media accounts if they on't get interested in a mafia killing using nerve agents!
Alternatively, they are all a bit embarrassed by Corbyn making a dick of himself and so are keeping quiet on the whole subject.
Is it time to remind everyone of my tip that she's still value as the next Potus?
It still wasn't the best speech I've ever seen at the SC though. That was - again - about Russian gangsterism and made in an extraordinary three languages:
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
"Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage." I am always a bit baffled to hear that sort of thing from dim lefties (no offence!), because it comes down to nostalgia for the days of empire and colonies and stuff, which I thought was meant to be a vice of the right? And last time it happened, cutting a figure turned out to mean being at the head of the queue to fellate the POTUS and get stuck in to some serious brownie murdering with him. Were you happy with that? We aren't post-Brexit, incidentally, and anyway Germany seems happy to stand up and be counted with us, and surely even you don't believe that Trump is in some way this country's fault?
"from dim lefties (no offence!)" - which bit didn't you mean?
"surely even you don't believe that Trump is in some way this country's fault?" - Well he was supported by Farage the man who (in his mind anyway) gave you Brexit.
'Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord; He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored; He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword: His truth is marching on.'
Russia just stated UK has means of producing the chemical used itself
Not exactly a convincing rebuttal of the British case, is it? At least come up with a plausible third party who might want to disrupt U.K.- Russia relations.
The correct response is up to both individual nations and the community of nations.
It is the difficult stuff - and it is particularly difficult when we public plebs can't see all the possible reactions: i.e. stuff may go on behind the scenes.
Personally, I'll give he same response as I gave when people gave similar Quisling arguments over Syria. The response has to be appropriate to negate any advantage the use of the weapons gave them. In the case of Syria, that'd be denying Assad territory or harming his forces to that level. In this case, to damage Russia's ability to perform intelligence operations and to harm them financially.
Your reaction is to do nothing, and I fear you would see every possible reaction as either over-the-top or wholly ineffective. Worse, your reaction will just lead to other B&C attacks.
I think you misrepresent my position. I'm not opposing doing something but I'm pointing out that most of the "somethings" being proposed are more to make us feel better about ourselves, that we are doing something, rather than because they have any meaningful impact or will change Putin's mind in any way.
I also said in my earlier that the best way to hit Putin was in the wallet - as DavidL pointed out the other day, the Russian economy is the same size as Spain's and, I suspect, much of the wealth is concentrated in very few hands. Going after the oligarchic and kleptocratic friends of Putin and especially their British assets and holdings would seem the most sensible move as the complaints about it would go straight to Vladimir P himself.
To make it hurt we may however have to take an economic hit ourselves - "no pain no gain" as they say - in the London luxury market but I'm sure we'll survive.
The other aspect is the one you mention - working with other nations to counteract Russian intelligence and restrict Russian financial activities. At the moment, we have plenty of vocal support - let's say if that translates into anything meaningful from the EU or the US or whether it will be all rhetoric and no substance.
I do have some bets on Nikki Haley being the next President/The GOP candidate in 2020.
If she were a Democrat, she would already be a near-certainty for the nomination.
However the reason I think she will be a Republican contender though is precisely because she is not a race and gender candidate. Those have been hindrances to her in climbing the Republican ladder. She has got where she is because she is extremely talented. That speech is an impressive performance, and it's hardly one of her standout turns.
Of course some of her more, ahem, interesting political positions would rule her out in Europe. But if America could stomach Trump, surely they can take her?
He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.
I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.
This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
Have you been to Salisbury recently Big_G? Life carries on much as usual - some trade impact but not as much as caused by the snow the week before.
I'm not trying to dimish the seriousness of the Skripal attack but let's not exaggerate - Salisbury is still a thriving, comfortable, lovely, minor city in England.
Is it time to remind everyone of my tip that she's still value as the next Potus?
It still wasn't the best speech I've ever seen at the SC though. That was - again - about Russian gangsterism and made in an extraordinary three languages:
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
"Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage." I am always a bit baffled to hear that sort of thing from dim lefties (no offence!), because it comes down to nostalgia for the days of empire and colonies and stuff, which I thought was meant to be a vice of the right? And last time it happened, cutting a figure turned out to mean being at the head of the queue to fellate the POTUS and get stuck in to some serious brownie murdering with him. Were you happy with that? We aren't post-Brexit, incidentally, and anyway Germany seems happy to stand up and be counted with us, and surely even you don't believe that Trump is in some way this country's fault?
Not too sure what you are getting at.
If you want to persuade me that our status as a world power is in the ascendancy, go ahead. The facts that I see rather suggest otherwise. Our military is exhausted, our foreign and diplomatic service is massively underfunded and has had no strategic direction for the past 8 years. Any military action of any significance is voted down in parliament. Our intelligence services are massively overstretched, due to domestic terrorism. So, we are nowhere near as much use to other powers as we used to be.
We were able to engineer sanctions against Russia after the Crimea episode essentially via the EU.
As an isolated nation state, we have few or no options.
He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.
I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.
This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
Have you been to Salisbury recently Big_G? Life carries on much as usual - some trade impact but not as much as caused by the snow the week before.
I'm not trying to dimish the seriousness of the Skripal attack but let's not exaggerate - Salisbury is still a thriving, comfortable, lovely, minor city in England.
Comments
Downing Street has backed away from a plan to scrap copper coins.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43407298
Anyway, on that numismatic note, I must be off.
On the topic of Russia, I see a book out by Garry Kasparov about Putin is entitled 'Winter is Coming: Why Vladimir Putin and the Enemies of the Free World Must be Stopped'
Am I silly for thinking the first part of that title is, somehow, to capitalise on a popular phrase from Game of Thrones?
There comes a point when we have to stop playing with the toy guns and soldiers and start living in the real world with the adults. Of course what has happened is reprehensible and has to be condemned and I get that, I really do.
The problem is what can you do that is effective (beyond political rhetoric) and meaningful. The best place to start is usually in the wallet area - seizing the assets of and making life as financially difficult for those directly implicated in this but who are they, where are they and where are their assets ? We could perhaps nobble Putin's pals who have big houses in Kensington but they are much cleverer than that so it would be a minor inconvenience at best.
The really hard bit is this - what has happened is terrible and there's a feeling we must "do something". The problem is no one really knows what an appropriate or proportionate "something" is so we vent our anger verbally and anyone who offers anything other than outrage is shouted down by the angry.
We are angry because we have been bullied and the bully is getting away with it. We want to fight back, to hit him where it hurts but we neither have the means nor arguably the will. He's a bully so do we burn his house down ? Hardly. Do we pat him on the shoulder and thank him ? Hardly. Perhaps cold indifference bordering on contempt is the response - that's not easy and in a charged political atmosphere not easy for a Prime Minister courting popularity. I do like her withdrawing Lavrov's invite - we should curtail all cultural, political and social contact beyond normal business and restrict that.
Turn our back, turn away - better than chasing down the street shouting and not landing a blow while he smirks at our powerlessness.
And resign the whip. Hodges is right on this one
So it really looks like a lot of words to say 'There's only so much we can do, we aren't sure what we should do, therefore we should do nothing'.
We have offered little beyond words at this point. So when I see people lamenting being 'attacked' for not giving in to outrage what I see is when people desperately warn the public not to turn into a mindless mob after an event, before there's any evidence the public will do so. 'It is important not to overreact' is an important point to always keep in mind, but when it happens during an initial reaction, prior to anyone indicating they are overreacting, it comes across as dissembling.
I don't think it fair to imply anyone who is displaying some outrage is acting like a child. The expression of outrage, even if we can do nothing about it, is surely expected with an event like this. Nor does it follow that anyone suggesting not getting outraged, and nothing much else, is some paragon of adulthood.
But analysts said the vote was a humbling start as only 364 MPs backed her appointment, when her conservative bloc and the SPDs have 399.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43400041
The problem is, we must do something.
There are several reasons, but let us take one that is close to many people's hearts, and particularly those on the left: disarmament.
We have very strict laws and controls on NBC weapons. Nuclear has been less successful of the the three, but biological and chemical controls have generally worked well. The sad thing is that the world has ignored breaches, particularly in Iraq and Syria, and that has weakened the entire NBC structure. After Miliband's stupidity over Syria (and I can put it worse than that), there will be other regimes looking into developing and potentially using B&C weapons, because they know they can use them with impunity.
If you believe in disarmament, then you need to react appropriately when people breach treaties. And that involves 'punishment' of varying types. Otherwise calls for disarmament becomes pointless, stupid bleating.
Turning our backs will just tell Putin and others that they can develop such weapons, and even use them. And that's obviously bad for us and the world.
This is why Corbyn's reaction is so incredibly dumb.
I'd laugh if it happened though !
How do we "punish" Russia ? Diplomatically, economically, culturally - yes, fine, but how effective would any of that really be ? Militarily - okay, what, how, when, where and how do you prevent escalation ?
This is the difficult stuff - the stuff that should keep politicians and political people awake at night. I've yet to hear of any response from anyone that is neither wholly over-the-top nor wholly ineffective.
lunatic fringeLabour leadership nobody is even hinting that May was involved in the Salisbury attempted murder!(Edited after I realised what I had written was both ambiguous and wrong.)
It is the difficult stuff - and it is particularly difficult when we public plebs can't see all the possible reactions: i.e. stuff may go on behind the scenes.
Personally, I'll give he same response as I gave when people gave similar Quisling arguments over Syria. The response has to be appropriate to negate any advantage the use of the weapons gave them. In the case of Syria, that'd be denying Assad territory or harming his forces to that level. In this case, to damage Russia's ability to perform intelligence operations and to harm them financially.
Your reaction is to do nothing, and I fear you would see every possible reaction as either over-the-top or wholly ineffective. Worse, your reaction will just lead to other B&C attacks.
If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-politics-maas/new-german-foreign-minister-criticizes-russian-response-to-chemical-attack-idUSKCN1GQ2O3
The real irony of course is that the two world leaders he most resembles in that regard from the recent past are a certain Tony Blair and an even more certain Donald Trump. Corbyn is the ultimate triumph of spin over substance - for at least Blair whatever his faults (which were many) had substance. I sometimes think he's not the break from New Labour but the fulfilment of it.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/974003505160753158
We should exclude all such oligarchs from this country as well as their families. We are dealing with a mafiosi style bunch of crooks and thugs. We should stop pretending that we are dealing with anything other than a failed state. Normal diplomatic relations are simply not applicable.
Miliband’s schoolboy politics over Syria in 2013 very probably had a direct bearing on the terrible events in Salisbury.
It is why I'm not as keen as many one nation Tories about Sarah Wollaston.
That David Davis was opposing the government should have been a sign to the likes of her.
Hurrah!
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/974008463809531908
You're having a giraffe.
England head coach Eddie Jones has "apologised unreservedly" for offensive comments he made about Wales and Ireland.
At a sponsors' talk in July 2017, the Australian described Wales as a "shit little place" and spoke about how disappointed he was by a recent defeat by the "scummy Irish".
Jones, 58, said he was "very sorry for any offence caused" and added: "No excuses. I shouldn't have said what I did."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43409476
Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.
The underlying truth is that May cannot follow through on her tough talk with Russia. There are no options beyond expelling a few diplomats. Post Brexit and in the Trump era, we cut a
truly pathetic figure on the world stage. Furthermore, there is no political will in the country for military action against Russia. In my view, the outrage about this Salisbury incident is something being whipped up by the media and has no basis in popular opinion, outside forums like this which are not representative of the population at large.
There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.
Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
No idea of how true this is as had never heard of the source before
This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
https://twitter.com/JSHeappey/status/973907507096838145
https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/974010333416378369
https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/974009617067003904
https://twitter.com/tictoc/status/974007962380337152
On what other occasion has he either made smart judgements or indeed proved anyone wrong? Even where he has been proven to be right over events - as in Iraq - it's hard to avoid the conclusion that he was doing it for the wrong reasons and that the result was pure coincidence.
Overestimating an opponent is just as dangerous as underestimating one. Last year most of us including me were guilty of the latter. Now everyone is guilty of the former. He is demonstrating over this situation all the qualities that took him to 20% in the polls - in abundance.
That's not to say he's incapable of winning the next election albeit it is in my judgement unlikely. However, if he became PM it's hard to see how he could last very long.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-russia-france/france-wants-proof-before-responding-on-britain-poisoning-affair-idUKKCN1GQ1WT
'Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword:
His truth is marching on.'
This is exactly the point, and something Corbyn and his fellow travellers are ignoring.
I also said in my earlier that the best way to hit Putin was in the wallet - as DavidL pointed out the other day, the Russian economy is the same size as Spain's and, I suspect, much of the wealth is concentrated in very few hands. Going after the oligarchic and kleptocratic friends of Putin and especially their British assets and holdings would seem the most sensible move as the complaints about it would go straight to Vladimir P himself.
To make it hurt we may however have to take an economic hit ourselves - "no pain no gain" as they say - in the London luxury market but I'm sure we'll survive.
The other aspect is the one you mention - working with other nations to counteract Russian intelligence and restrict Russian financial activities. At the moment, we have plenty of vocal support - let's say if that translates into anything meaningful from the EU or the US or whether it will be all rhetoric and no substance.
The reaction is nothing compared to a terrorist attack. Its seen as a mafia killing. That is also how much of the rest of the world see it.
I'm not at all trying to downplay the seriousness of the incident for the people involved, I am trying to assess the fallout. I think that there will be no significant international condemnation of Russia, I think it will be a national embarrassment for us, and I think it will play in to Corbyns hands. Of course, I hope I am wrong.
It still wasn't the best speech I've ever seen at the SC though. That was - again - about Russian gangsterism and made in an extraordinary three languages:
https://youtu.be/211DmjvYNK0
And of course it had as much effect as a gnat's fart, but that's unfortunately the nature of the UN.
Alternatively, they are all a bit embarrassed by Corbyn making a dick of himself and so are keeping quiet on the whole subject.
Oh dear, Jeremy Corbyn.....
"surely even you don't believe that Trump is in some way this country's fault?" - Well he was supported by Farage the man who (in his mind anyway) gave you Brexit.
However the reason I think she will be a Republican contender though is precisely because she is not a race and gender candidate. Those have been hindrances to her in climbing the Republican ladder. She has got where she is because she is extremely talented. That speech is an impressive performance, and it's hardly one of her standout turns.
Of course some of her more, ahem, interesting political positions would rule her out in Europe. But if America could stomach Trump, surely they can take her?
I'm not trying to dimish the seriousness of the Skripal attack but let's not exaggerate - Salisbury is still a thriving, comfortable, lovely, minor city in England.
I really thought he was telling the truth on that one...and only that one.,,
Do I believe we do actually make it? No. Do I believe we would every use it? Not in a milllion years.
Having the means is not the same as committing the act.
If you want to persuade me that our status as a world power is in the ascendancy, go ahead. The facts that I see rather suggest otherwise. Our military is exhausted, our foreign and diplomatic service is massively underfunded and has had no strategic direction for the past 8 years. Any military action of any significance is voted down in parliament. Our intelligence services are massively overstretched, due to domestic terrorism. So, we are nowhere near as much use to other powers as we used to be.
We were able to engineer sanctions against Russia after the Crimea episode essentially via the EU.
As an isolated nation state, we have few or no options.