Um no. Unless May was planning on leaving NATO and abandoning the 800 British troops deployed to Estonia already, then there would certainly be a response.
Dura Ace can always be relied upon to b[out personal bias ahead of any real knowledge he might have.
Post Basra the prime (and possibly sole) directive for deployed British forces is what is coyly described as 'force protection'. If you think 800 British troops (of which probably only 150 won't be blanket stackers, dental hygienists, etc.) are a) going to halt Ivan or b) even try then you are simply wrong.
Article V or not, NATO is not going to start a war with Russia over Estonia. They are just not.
It would not just be British troops but French, German, Italian, Polish, Czech, Lithuanian, Latvian, Danish, American and Canadian troops too.
The core principle of NATO is that an attack on a NATO country is an attack on all NATO countries which is why Putin is unlikely to try it
Putin also knows what everyone else knows and that is that an incursion is going to get a whole bunch of sanctions, economic and otherwise, and not much else.
Really, no one is going to go to war over Eastern Europe. And despite the wild enthusiasms of the armchair Brexiters (not saying you) to submit arguably the most important sovereign issue of all (that of going to war) to an international body, it still ain't gonna happen.
In the event of a full-scale invasion of a NATO country it almost certainly would with NATO forces being sent an masse to reinforce NATO forces already in Estonia as soon as the first Russian tank crossed the border
I doubt it. Where would it all come from and when, even if there was the will to do it?
But I applaud your championing of the resignation of our sovereignty to NATO.
Poland, the Czechs, the Latvians, the Lithuanians, the Turks, most of Western European NATO forces and US forces garrisoned in Europe before further US and Canadian reinforcements arrive
haha hahahaha hahahahahahahahahahaha
How many MBTs do the Latvians have?
The Germans and Poles have plenty which would be quickly sent to the Baltic States
May should go after their financial assets publicly.
Privately, perhaps MI6 and GCHQ might want to do a bit of penetration testing on key Russian cyber infrastructure, to generate a few embarrassments for Putin too.
I posted some initials actions required on the previous thread :
1. Expel the Russian ambassador and all but a skeleton staff at the embassy to be engaged in verifiable humanitarian activities.
2 Advise the FA to withdraw from the World Cup. Place a case to FIFA that we cannot compete in a tournament hosted by a state attacking us. Albeit 3 months away propose Germany host the tournament and Italy replace Russia.
3. Formally declare the Russian Federation government a rogue state and criminal enterprise.
4. Place all evidence from all sources of world wide Russian criminal activities in the public domain.
5. All filmed intercepts of Russian military incursions into UK airspace to be placed in the public domain
6. Putin's wealth to be openly scrutinized by House of Commons Select Committee.
7. All tools of of the City of London to be utilized against Russian assets.
8. Beef up Russian section of the BBC World Service.
9. Advise our trading partners and allies that preference will be given to nations/companies not trading with Russia.
10. Stop the cuts to the UK military NOW !!!!!!!!!
Most of these actions would be ineffective, because the Russians will spin it as a misinformation campaign. They would also have the effect of isolating the UK, because other countries would be unlikely to follow, as we have less influence than we used to.
The only realistic option is to find a way of increasing spending on the military, on the foreign and diplomatic services, on the intelligence services, and on the BBC; whilst pursuing a policy of containing Russia and avoiding conflict, thus challenging the effectiveness of the regime, in the hope that Putin can be replaced. So, a more effective version of what we have been doing for the last ten years.
Of course, this then runs in to the problem that there would need to be major sacrificies in other areas of the domestic budget to support such a strategy, and there is no political will for that.
I am disappointed that Mrs May has not taken more financial measures against Russia.
There has been too much dirty Russian (and Chinese and other emerging markets) money flowing into the UK and it is creating a risk for us - political but financial also. Private banking and wealth management for ultra high net worth individuals is beginning to give off the sort of whiff which was seen in other financial sectors before the financial crash. Lots of entities have been rushing to embrace this wealth and, as always happens, some of the checks and balances, some of the “Is this really wise?” questions get ignored or assumed away.
Even if it costs us, I think we need to clamp down very much harder on the ability of Russia and some others to access our financial expertise. This was the perfect opportunity to do so. It should not be lost.
If we don’t I fear that there may be more reputation-harming scandals in the making.
May should go after their financial assets publicly.
Privately, perhaps MI6 and GCHQ might want to do a bit of penetration testing on key Russian cyber infrastructure, to generate a few embarrassments for Putin too.
I posted some initials actions required on the previous thread :
1. Expel the Russian ambassador and all but a skeleton staff at the embassy to be engaged in verifiable humanitarian activities.
2 Advise the FA to withdraw from the World Cup. Place a case to FIFA that we cannot compete in a tournament hosted by a state attacking us. Albeit 3 months away propose Germany host the tournament and Italy replace Russia.
3. Formally declare the Russian Federation government a rogue state and criminal enterprise.
4. Place all evidence from all sources of world wide Russian criminal activities in the public domain.
5. All filmed intercepts of Russian military incursions into UK airspace to be placed in the public domain
6. Putin's wealth to be openly scrutinized by House of Commons Select Committee.
7. All tools of of the City of London to be utilized against Russian assets.
8. Beef up Russian section of the BBC World Service.
9. Advise our trading partners and allies that preference will be given to nations/companies not trading with Russia.
10. Stop the cuts to the UK military NOW !!!!!!!!!
I wouldn’t have a problem with any of that. (3) is possibly the biggest step.
I expect modest increases in defence spending next year for the 2019 round of spending reviews, and Hammond may hat-tip this in the Autumn.
I suspect that the only way to make 3 happen is to expel Russia from the UN. And that would be a big move. But at least we would get to see which countries Putin has bought....
Russia does what it does because it can; it is called realpolitik, a concept which many of our PB warriors seem to be missing.
That's a misreading of the situation if ever I have seen one. That's been the crux of most of the outrage - that they have been doing what they do because they can, and so we need to consider how best to stop them doing such things in the future, if anything we can do can do so. Maybe the answer is no, but people suggesting options does not mean they don't know realpolitik, just that they are seeking answers to it.
Not sure why you bothered 'not to get all Seamus Milne' by making the same point as Seamus Milne though. If you don't believe the government account that it is highly likely to have been Russia, or think its not certain enough to be so bold as to call it highly likely, there;s no crime in saying so.
I am disappointed that Mrs May has not taken more financial measures against Russia.
There has been too much dirty Russian (and Chinese and other emerging markets) money flowing into the UK and it is creating a risk for us - political but financial also. Private banking and wealth management for ultra high net worth individuals is beginning to give off the sort of whiff which was seen in other financial sectors before the financial crash. Lots of entities have been rushing to embrace this wealth and, as always happens, some of the checks and balances, some of the “Is this really wise?” questions get ignored or assumed away.
Even if it costs us, I think we need to clamp down very much harder on the ability of Russia and some others to access our financial expertise. This was the perfect opportunity to do so. It should not be lost.
If we don’t I fear that there may be more reputation-harming scandals in the making.
Who is to say that she won't ? If it were to happen, it would take a little time to establish the principles.
May should go after their financial assets publicly.
Privately, perhaps MI6 and GCHQ might want to do a bit of penetration testing on key Russian cyber infrastructure, to generate a few embarrassments for Putin too.
I posted some initials actions required on the previous thread :
1. Expel the Russian ambassador and all but a skeleton staff at the embassy to be engaged in verifiable humanitarian activities.
2 Advise the FA to withdraw from the World Cup. Place a case to FIFA that we cannot compete in a tournament hosted by a state attacking us. Albeit 3 months away propose Germany host the tournament and Italy replace Russia.
3. Formally declare the Russian Federation government a rogue state and criminal enterprise.
4. Place all evidence from all sources of world wide Russian criminal activities in the public domain.
5. All filmed intercepts of Russian military incursions into UK airspace to be placed in the public domain
6. Putin's wealth to be openly scrutinized by House of Commons Select Committee.
7. All tools of of the City of London to be utilized against Russian assets.
8. Beef up Russian section of the BBC World Service.
9. Advise our trading partners and allies that preference will be given to nations/companies not trading with Russia.
10. Stop the cuts to the UK military NOW !!!!!!!!!
I'd love to see all ten done, but I doubt more than one will happen.
Some posters seem a bit confused. Are webeing condemned for being insufficiently bellicose, or insufficiently pacifistic?
The theoretical extremes are: we concede Russia's innocence and agree to pay them substantial libel damages, and we take off and nuke the Kremlin from orbit - only way to be sure. The middle ground is some package of less exciting things like expulsions and boycotts and asset seizing. Everyone sane is somewhere in this middle ground, and what's important is not exactly what we do, but doing it while maintaining world support and not losing face. It is only hindsight which blinds us to how close we were to a good old fashioned TMay fiasco, and she has actually produced a superlative result. Support from the US and from the big EU players were very much not a given.
So chill pills all round, really. she has done enough to be going on with and I have no doubt there is more in the pipeline. We have to be clear that we are at all times constrained by the rule of law; the last thing we want to happen is for us to announce we are confiscating Chelsea FC, and some poxy lawyer standing up and saying yebbut you can't actually do that. We have to do things right, which takes time.
Touch of the Milibands, very good. It is completely unfair, but I totally accept what that means, and that sometimes the way people look or sound really undermines what may or may not be someone perfectly well prepared and suited to a role.
Edit: I have been told by some acquaintances I look a bit like a less handsome Ed Miliband, for what it is worth.
I read that the Tory private polling in late 2010 and early 2011 found that voters had only two real opinions on Ed Miliband, 1) He had stabbed his brother in the back 2) He looked a bit weird
They think 2) was the reason that Ed never beat Dave on the best PM scores during that Parliament.
May should go after their financial assets publicly.
Privately, perhaps MI6 and GCHQ might want to do a bit of penetration testing on key Russian cyber infrastructure, to generate a few embarrassments for Putin too.
I posted some initials actions required on the previous thread :
1. Expel the Russian ambassador and all but a skeleton staff at the embassy to be engaged in verifiable humanitarian activities.
2 Advise the FA to withdraw from the World Cup. Place a case to FIFA that we cannot compete in a tournament hosted by a state attacking us. Albeit 3 months away propose Germany host the tournament and Italy replace Russia.
3. Formally declare the Russian Federation government a rogue state and criminal enterprise.
4. Place all evidence from all sources of world wide Russian criminal activities in the public domain.
5. All filmed intercepts of Russian military incursions into UK airspace to be placed in the public domain
6. Putin's wealth to be openly scrutinized by House of Commons Select Committee.
7. All tools of of the City of London to be utilized against Russian assets.
8. Beef up Russian section of the BBC World Service.
9. Advise our trading partners and allies that preference will be given to nations/companies not trading with Russia.
10. Stop the cuts to the UK military NOW !!!!!!!!!
I wouldn’t have a problem with any of that. (3) is possibly the biggest step.
I expect modest increases in defence spending next year for the 2019 round of spending reviews, and Hammond may hat-tip this in the Autumn.
I suspect that the only way to make 3 happen is to expel Russia from the UN. And that would be a big move. But at least we would get to see which countries Putin has bought....
Russia could veto it. The only way to do that would be to disband the UN and create a new one, and the UK's status would almost certainly end up being be reduced.
Russia does what it does because it can; it is called realpolitik, a concept which many of our PB warriors seem to be missing.
That's a misreading of the situation if ever I have seen one. That's been the crux of most of the outrage - that they have been doing what they do because they can, and so we need to consider how best to stop them doing such things in the future, if anything we can do can do so. Maybe the answer is no, but people suggesting options does not mean they don't know realpolitik, just that they are seeking answers to it.
Not sure why you bothered 'not to get all Seamus Milne' by making the same point as Seamus Milne though. If you don't believe the government account that it is highly likely to have been Russia, or think its not certain enough to be so bold as to call it highly likely, there;s no crime in saying so.
Well Occam’s razor says it was Russia. But we don’t know do we?
Suppose Putin/Russia does go for Estonia. I view it as:
1. NATO/EU do nothing.
In which case, Putin wins big time, and I cannot help but see anything except the end of NATO (Failure to guarantee a member state) and probably the EU. Latvia and Lithuania would leave the EU and NATO straight away in protest. Finland would probably leave the EU too.
2. NATO fights.
In which case, I struggle to see it not ending in nuclear war. NATO might force them out of Estonia but Putin would probably never accept the humiliating climb down of being forced to retreat. So he lobs one (and probably only one) at some target in the west to save face.
NATO will have to lob one back. And then Putin, to keep saving face, is forced to do this:
So probably why he won't do anything - the risk of (2) is still too great for him.
Or we have the scenario that existed and people were preparing for 30 years ago: accelerated land grab, then standstill (either with our without battlefield nukes having been deployed), then negotiate.
Putin is unlikely to invade Estonia. As per yesterdays discussion, the goal is to destabalise and fracture the EU, and bring the entire continent in to the Russian sphere of influence.
Finlandisation, in cold war speak, but a more sinister version.
May should go after their financial assets publicly.
Privately, perhaps MI6 and GCHQ might want to do a bit of penetration testing on key Russian cyber infrastructure, to generate a few embarrassments for Putin too.
I posted some initials actions required on the previous thread :
1. Expel the Russian ambassador and all but a skeleton staff at the embassy to be engaged in verifiable humanitarian activities.
2 Advise the FA to withdraw from the World Cup. Place a case to FIFA that we cannot compete in a tournament hosted by a state attacking us. Albeit 3 months away propose Germany host the tournament and Italy replace Russia.
3. Formally declare the Russian Federation government a rogue state and criminal enterprise.
4. Place all evidence from all sources of world wide Russian criminal activities in the public domain.
5. All filmed intercepts of Russian military incursions into UK airspace to be placed in the public domain
6. Putin's wealth to be openly scrutinized by House of Commons Select Committee.
7. All tools of of the City of London to be utilized against Russian assets.
8. Beef up Russian section of the BBC World Service.
9. Advise our trading partners and allies that preference will be given to nations/companies not trading with Russia.
10. Stop the cuts to the UK military NOW !!!!!!!!!
Most of these actions would be ineffective, because the Russians will spin it as a misinformation campaign. They would also have the effect of isolating the UK, because other countries would be unlikely to follow, as we have less influence than we used to.
The only realistic option is to find a way of increasing spending on the military, on the foreign and diplomatic services, on the intelligence services, and on the BBC; whilst pursuing a policy of containing Russia and avoiding conflict, thus challenging the effectiveness of the regime, in the hope that Putin can be replaced. So, a more effective version of what we have been doing for the last ten years.
Of course, this then runs in to the problem that there would need to be major sacrificies in other areas of the domestic budget to support such a strategy, and there is no political will for that.
We are in a difficult spot. A looming crisis.
The UK needs to give a firm lead, even if it means our allies are lukewarm initially, and be on the front foot in this matter. If Russia feels the heat so much the better.
The time for passivity is well past. If we fail to act appropriately then the bully will return as they always do. Appeasement in any form is not an option.
Suppose Putin/Russia does go for Estonia. I view it as:
1. NATO/EU do nothing.
In which case, Putin wins big time, and I cannot help but see anything except the end of NATO (Failure to guarantee a member state) and probably the EU. Latvia and Lithuania would leave the EU and NATO straight away in protest. Finland would probably leave the EU too.
2. NATO fights.
In which case, I struggle to see it not ending in nuclear war. NATO might force them out of Estonia but Putin would probably never accept the humiliating climb down of being forced to retreat. So he lobs one (and probably only one) at some target in the west to save face.
NATO will have to lob one back. And then Putin, to keep saving face, is forced to do this:
If some unfortunate accident were to befall Putin - what happens then with Russia?
Would the loss of the key figurehead mean that infighting would destroy the ruling elite and allow moderate forces to come to the fore - or is there someone even worse waiting in the wings?
We are then talking about Estonia. Now, I don't think the Russians are going to march in tomorrow morning; if they were serious about annexation (and I have no idea if they are), they would fund a political party in the country, gain support for it domestically and then at some point thereafter announce that they had been asked to help on account of the discrimination that party and its supporters were facing - a multi-year strategy).
I agree with the timetable being multi-year, but playing devil's advocate:
On 1/1/1938, Hitler and Germany hadn't done any foreign ventures yet. By 31/12/1939, Hitler had caused international crisis/land grabs over Czechoslovakia (twice Sept 1938, March 1939), Austria (once March 1938), Lithuania (once March 1939) and Poland (once Sept 1939). And he'd won all of them (well, perhaps not Poland as a long term goal).
It can probably be done faster, if Putin is minded to really push it.
If some unfortunate accident were to befall Putin - what happens then with Russia?
Would the loss of the key figurehead mean that infighting would destroy the ruling elite and allow moderate forces to come to the fore - or is there someone even worse waiting in the wings?
It strikes me that it could go either way, like lots of things in football and life.
There seems to be a quite staggering degree of complacency amongst the public at the revelation that one of the most dangerous substances known to man has been sprayed around (or however it was administered) in a town in the UK. Have people not quite understood? I had a look at Mumsnet (..someone has to..), expecting to find wall-to-wall anxiety about the prospect of their little ones being poisoned in Zizzis - which could easily have happened - but there's hardly any discussion of the ramifications. Quite extraordinary.
On the measures the UK government should take, @JackW's list is a good one but I'm not convinced that his more draconian approach would be wise at this stage. Obviously there will be tit-for-tat retaliation to anything we do, and we have significant economic interests in Russia (BP, Shell..). We could end up harming ourselves more than Putin.
Furthermore, some of the measures would require very active cooperation from our allies - for example, any attempt to change the World Cup arrangements would be a complete damp squib, and just make us look even weaker, if we didn't get full support from a good number of key nations.
For now, I think the government has got it about right, but the situation is not static so we'll have to see how things develop.
As for Corbyn: it is depressing to see apparently grown-up people making excuses for him.
(And BTW - I did tell y'all that Gavin Williamson was most unimpressive some months ago).
There seems to be a quite staggering degree of complacency amongst the public at the revelation that one of the most dangerous substances known to man has been sprayed around (or however it was administered) in a town the UK. Have people not quite understood? I had a look at Mumsnet (..someone has to..), expecting to find wall-to-wall anxiety about the prospect of their little ones being poisoned in Zizzis, but there's hardly any discussion of the ramifications. Quite extraordinary.
On the measures the UK government should take, @JackW's list is a good one but I'm not convinced that his more draconian approach would be wise at this stage. Obviously there will be tit-for-tat retaliation to anything we do, and we have significant economic interests in Russia (BP, Shell..). We could end up harming ourselves more than Putin.
Furthermore, some of the measures would require very active cooperation from our allies - for example, any attempt to change the World Cup arrangements would be a complete damp squib, and just make us look even weaker, if we didn't get full support from a good number of key nations.
For now, I think the government has got it about right, but the situation is not static so we'll have to see how things develop.
As for Corbyn: it is depressing to see apparently grown-up people making excuses for him.
(And BTW - I did tell y'all that Gavin Williamson was most unimpressive some months ago).
The same people who are defending corbyn over his Putin appeasement are the same that are all over trump for doing the same.
If some unfortunate accident were to befall Putin - what happens then with Russia?
Would the loss of the key figurehead mean that infighting would destroy the ruling elite and allow moderate forces to come to the fore - or is there someone even worse waiting in the wings?
It strikes me that it could go either way, like lots of things in football and life.
Every leader eventually has to quit the scene - whether voluntarily or otherwise. I just don't have enough knowledge of how much it is a Putin Cult - cut off the head and the whole thing collapses or whether the structures he has put in place ensure that his successors are lined up and ready for action.
Um no. Unless May was planning on leaving NATO and abandoning the 800 British troops deployed to Estonia already, then there would certainly be a response.
Dura Ace can always be relied upon to b[out personal bias ahead of any real knowledge he might have.
Post Basra the prime (and possibly sole) directive for deployed British forces is what is coyly described as 'force protection'. If you think 800 British troops (of which probably only 150 won't be blanket stackers, dental hygienists, etc.) are a) going to halt Ivan or b) even try then you are simply wrong.
Article V or not, NATO is not going to start a war with Russia over Estonia. They are just not.
It would not just be British troops but French, German, Italian, Polish, Czech, Lithuanian, Latvian, Danish, American and Canadian troops too.
The core principle of NATO is that an attack on a NATO country is an attack on all NATO countries which is why Putin is unlikely to try it
Putin also knows what everyone else knows and that is that an incursion is gonna happen.
In the event of a full-scale invasion of a NATO country it almost certainly would with NATO forces being sent an masse to reinforce NATO forces already in Estonia as soon as the first Russian tank crossed the border
I doubt it. Where would it all come from and when, even if there was the will to do it?
But I applaud your championing of the resignation of our sovereignty to NATO.
Poland, the Czechs, the Latvians, the Lithuanians, the Turks, most of Western European NATO forces and US forces garrisoned in Europe before further US and Canadian reinforcements arrive
haha hahahaha hahahahahahahahahahaha
How many MBTs do the Latvians have?
The Germans and Poles have plenty which would be quickly sent to the Baltic States
If some unfortunate accident were to befall Putin - what happens then with Russia?
Would the loss of the key figurehead mean that infighting would destroy the ruling elite and allow moderate forces to come to the fore - or is there someone even worse waiting in the wings?
It strikes me that it could go either way, like lots of things in football and life.
Every leader eventually has to quit the scene - whether voluntarily or otherwise. I just don't have enough knowledge of how much it is a Putin Cult - cut off the head and the whole thing collapses or whether the structures he has put in place ensure that his successors are lined up and ready for action.
From the outside it does look very Putin centric, potentially hard for someone else to merely step into his shoes, but there's probably more going on in the background. The Chinese probably had the right idea for stable collective dictatorship, but Xi has managed to overturned that pretty quickly so I guess it wasn't as stable as it looked.
There seems to be a quite staggering degree of complacency amongst the public at the revelation that one of the most dangerous substances known to man has been sprayed around (or however it was administered) in a town the UK. Have people not quite understood? I had a look at Mumsnet (..someone has to..), expecting to find wall-to-wall anxiety about the prospect of their little ones being poisoned in Zizzis, but there's hardly any discussion of the ramifications. Quite extraordinary.
On the measures the UK government should take, @JackW's list is a good one but I'm not convinced that his more draconian approach would be wise at this stage. Obviously there will be tit-for-tat retaliation to anything we do, and we have significant economic interests in Russia (BP, Shell..). We could end up harming ourselves more than Putin.
Furthermore, some of the measures would require very active cooperation from our allies - for example, any attempt to change the World Cup arrangements would be a complete damp squib, and just make us look even weaker, if we didn't get full support from a good number of key nations.
For now, I think the government has got it about right, but the situation is not static so we'll have to see how things develop.
As for Corbyn: it is depressing to see apparently grown-up people making excuses for him.
(And BTW - I did tell y'all that Gavin Williamson was most unimpressive some months ago).
The same people who are defending corbyn over his Putin appeasement are the same that are all over trump for doing the same.
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
There seems to be a quite staggering degree of complacency amongst the public at the revelation that one of the most dangerous substances known to man has been sprayed around (or however it was administered) in a town the UK. Have people not quite understood? I had a look at Mumsnet (..someone has to..), expecting to find wall-to-wall anxiety about the prospect of their little ones being poisoned in Zizzis, but there's hardly any discussion of the ramifications. Quite extraordinary.
On the measures the UK government should take, @JackW's list is a good one but I'm not convinced that his more draconian approach would be wise at this stage. Obviously there will be tit-for-tat retaliation to anything we do, and we have significant economic interests in Russia (BP, Shell..). We could end up harming ourselves more than Putin.
Furthermore, some of the measures would require very active cooperation from our allies - for example, any attempt to change the World Cup arrangements would be a complete damp squib, and just make us look even weaker, if we didn't get full support from a good number of key nations.
For now, I think the government has got it about right, but the situation is not static so we'll have to see how things develop.
As for Corbyn: it is depressing to see apparently grown-up people making excuses for him.
(And BTW - I did tell y'all that Gavin Williamson was most unimpressive some months ago).
The same people who are defending corbyn over his Putin appeasement are the same that are all over trump for doing the same.
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Mr. Hemmelig, if we're going to denounce every poster who inaccurately predicted the last election (or two) there'll be almost no-one here.
That is of course correct. But I think you'd probably agree that ARSE was in a league of its own in terms of its sheer arrogance and bragging that "I am always right and never wrong".
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Alex Salmond has launched a staunch defence of his weekly show on Russian broadcaster RT as he warned regulator Ofcom against closing the channel down. Opponents have accused the former Scottish first minister of being a "useful idiot for the Kremlin". But Mr Salmond insisted that the state-funded channel was not propaganda, and he had never been told what to say.
Mr. Hemmelig, if we're going to denounce every poster who inaccurately predicted the last election (or two) there'll be almost no-one here.
That is of course correct. But I think you'd probably agree that ARSE was in a league of its own in terms of its sheer arrogance and bragging that "I am always right and never wrong".
Jack's ARSE had a very accurate emission for 2015 if I recall. It's release of materials for the 2016 referendum was less accurate, and I don't think Jack released anything from his ARSE for 2017 (perhaps that explains Salisbury! A build up of gasses then released a year later).
Alex Salmond has launched a staunch defence of his weekly show on Russian broadcaster RT as he warned regulator Ofcom against closing the channel down. Opponents have accused the former Scottish first minister of being a "useful idiot for the Kremlin". But Mr Salmond insisted that the state-funded channel was not propaganda, and he had never been told what to say.
Because if individuals on it haven't been told what to say, then it is impossible for other parts to be propaganda!
(I actually have no idea of its content, most of it might be fine, but I question his logic)
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Hard to believe Mrs May wants Gavin Williamson to succeed her and will do all in her power to make it happen.
Alex Salmond has launched a staunch defence of his weekly show on Russian broadcaster RT as he warned regulator Ofcom against closing the channel down. Opponents have accused the former Scottish first minister of being a "useful idiot for the Kremlin". But Mr Salmond insisted that the state-funded channel was not propaganda, and he had never been told what to say.
Salmond doesn't want to lose that part of his income - what a surprise.
Of course RT is part of a Russian propaganda exercise. Everyone knows it is.
"The maximum sentence a judge can impose for manslaughter is imprisonment for life. The judge may impose other sentences, including a prison sentence to be served immediately, suspended imprisonment or a community sentence."
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
ie be more dull. There are plenty of serious types in Cabinet, Hammond, Rudd, Liddington, of course May herself, there is room for a few who speak their mind and call a spade a spade.
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Hard to believe Mrs May wants Gavin Williamson to succeed her and will do all in her power to make it happen.
She’s a fecking disgrace.
He is far too immature. When she goes there will be many more candidates and I expect another female to win the succession
Because if individuals on it haven't been told what to say, then it is impossible for other parts to be propaganda!
It's a stupid argument from Salmond, RT don't need to tell anyone what to say. All RT needs to do is hire and book people who say the things they want. Does anyone think RT has a balanced output?
Mr. Hemmelig, if we're going to denounce every poster who inaccurately predicted the last election (or two) there'll be almost no-one here.
That is of course correct. But I think you'd probably agree that ARSE was in a league of its own in terms of its sheer arrogance and bragging that "I am always right and never wrong".
Jack's ARSE had a very accurate emission for 2015 if I recall. It's release of materials for the 2016 referendum was less accurate, and I don't think Jack released anything from his ARSE for 2017 (perhaps that explains Salisbury! A build up of gasses then released a year later).
I actually don’t think it’s the same people who are all over Trump re Russia, making excuses for Corbyn. There are quite a few people on the radical or far left whose criticisms of Trump don’t really centre on the issue of Russia. A lot of the people who are most critical of Trump on the Russia issue are actually liberals, especially centrist liberals.
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
ie be more dull. There are plenty of serious types in Cabinet, Hammond, Rudd, Liddington, of course May herself, there is room for a few who speak their mind and call a spade a spade.
Macron is younger than Williamson
Macron is mature Williamson is not and he is not going to be the next leader
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Hard to believe Mrs May wants Gavin Williamson to succeed her and will do all in her power to make it happen.
She’s a fecking disgrace.
He is far too immature. When she goes there will be many more candidates and I expect another female to win the succession
After a dull leader the Tories tend to pick someone with charisma and visa-versa e.g. Heath then Thatcher, Thatcher then Major, Major then Hague, Hague then IDS/Howard, IDS/Howard then Cameron, Cameron then May
If some unfortunate accident were to befall Putin - what happens then with Russia?
Would the loss of the key figurehead mean that infighting would destroy the ruling elite and allow moderate forces to come to the fore - or is there someone even worse waiting in the wings?
It strikes me that it could go either way, like lots of things in football and life.
Every leader eventually has to quit the scene - whether voluntarily or otherwise. I just don't have enough knowledge of how much it is a Putin Cult - cut off the head and the whole thing collapses or whether the structures he has put in place ensure that his successors are lined up and ready for action.
From the outside it does look very Putin centric, potentially hard for someone else to merely step into his shoes, but there's probably more going on in the background. The Chinese probably had the right idea for stable collective dictatorship, but Xi has managed to overturned that pretty quickly so I guess it wasn't as stable as it looked.
From the outside it does look like Putin holds much of the kleptocracy's money. I suspect if anything happened to him, there would be a significant shitfest as the others muscled in to claim it....
It is fair enough in this instance I think. You have to wonder though if the sentence would have been more severe if she was say a black male and the other party was a white female.
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Hard to believe Mrs May wants Gavin Williamson to succeed her and will do all in her power to make it happen.
She’s a fecking disgrace.
He is far too immature. When she goes there will be many more candidates and I expect another female to win the succession
After a dull leader the Tories tend to pick someone with charisma and visa-versa e.g. Heath then Thatcher, Thatcher then Major, Major then Hague, Hague then IDS/Howard, IDS/Howard then Cameron, Cameron then May
It's a stupid argument from Salmond, RT don't need to tell anyone what to say. All RT needs to do is hire and book people who say the things they want. Does anyone think RT has a balanced output?
"The maximum sentence a judge can impose for manslaughter is imprisonment for life. The judge may impose other sentences, including a prison sentence to be served immediately, suspended imprisonment or a community sentence."
A regularly scheduled area board meeting for local councillors and community partners in Salisbury this evening. I suspect without looking that the agenda will be overtaken by events.
They are more than enough to hold the Russians for a bit until further NATO reinforcements arrived
Perhaps you are too young to have been made to watch Threads at school in the 1980s? Such a war is likely to escalate to nuclear level very quickly, especially if the Americans ignore their NATO obligations and decline to get involved. There won't be any "holding the Russians for a bit".
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Hard to believe Mrs May wants Gavin Williamson to succeed her and will do all in her power to make it happen.
She’s a fecking disgrace.
He is far too immature. When she goes there will be many more candidates and I expect another female to win the succession
After a dull leader the Tories tend to pick someone with charisma and visa-versa e.g. Heath then Thatcher, Thatcher then Major, Major then Hague, Hague then IDS/Howard, IDS/Howard then Cameron, Cameron then May
Well that rules out Williamson
Well after Boris he is the most charismatic in the Cabinet in my view but it is a very low bar admittedly
I actually don’t think it’s the same people who are all over Trump re Russia, making excuses for Corbyn. There are quite a few people on the radical or far left whose criticisms of Trump don’t really centre on the issue of Russia. A lot of the people who are most critical of Trump on the Russia issue are actually liberals, especially centrist liberals.
I agree Also many think Putin is the better over two evils regarding Syria.
They are more than enough to hold the Russians for a bit until further NATO reinforcements arrived
Perhaps you are too young to have been made to watch Threads at school in the 1980s? Such a war is likely to escalate to nuclear level very quickly, especially if the Americans ignore their NATO obligations and decline to get involved. There won't be any "holding the Russians for a bit".
I was alive in the 1980s and it was the threat of a strong response which helped contain Soviet expansion. I also doubt any invasion of the Baltics would escalate to nuclear level but the threat of the full force of NATO being deployed to meet it helps keep Putin in check
"The maximum sentence a judge can impose for manslaughter is imprisonment for life. The judge may impose other sentences, including a prison sentence to be served immediately, suspended imprisonment or a community sentence."
I can't get very excited about this. the judge had the significant advantage over you and me of having seen the Defendant and heard the evidence.
Oh I wasn't saying it was necessarily unreasonable, as you say I haven't seen the evidence, just that I was surprised.
The evidence is all pretty much out in the public. The victim inventing and setting up the stunt are whopping mitigating factors (Along with the stupidity of both of them). This wasn't a prank involving someone scaring someone near a live rail which they might fall onto and die for instance - its more akin to vloggers that head up high buildings then fall off whilst trying to monetise gymnastics from the rooftops.
The victim was equally, if not more culpable in this one.
After a dull leader the Tories tend to pick someone with charisma and visa-versa e.g. Heath then Thatcher, Thatcher then Major, Major then Hague, Hague then IDS/Howard, IDS/Howard then Cameron, Cameron then May
Not a very persuasive or accurate list....out of it, only Cameron had any charisma when he became party leader. Thatcher only acquired it after the Falklands. Hague was only charismatic in the sense that he was too weird for the public to imagine as prime minister - a Yorkshire Ed Miliband.
After a dull leader the Tories tend to pick someone with charisma and visa-versa e.g. Heath then Thatcher, Thatcher then Major, Major then Hague, Hague then IDS/Howard, IDS/Howard then Cameron, Cameron then May
Not a very persuasive or accurate list....out of it, only Cameron had any charisma when he became party leader. Thatcher only acquired it after the Falklands. Hague was only charismatic in the sense that he was too weird for the public to imagine as prime minister - a Yorkshire Ed Miliband.
After a dull leader the Tories tend to pick someone with charisma and visa-versa e.g. Heath then Thatcher, Thatcher then Major, Major then Hague, Hague then IDS/Howard, IDS/Howard then Cameron, Cameron then May
Not a very persuasive or accurate list....out of it, only Cameron had any charisma when he became party leader. Thatcher only acquired it after the Falklands. Hague was only charismatic in the sense that he was too weird for the public to imagine as prime minister - a Yorkshire Ed Miliband.
Thatcher certainly had more charisma than Heath when she beat him for the leadership in 1975.
Hague was the best Tory orator of his generation by far, Ed Miliband speeches make watching paint dry seem exciting, Corbyn at least is an improvement for Labour on that score and knows how to hold an audience
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
ie be more dull. There are plenty of serious types in Cabinet, Hammond, Rudd, Liddington, of course May herself, there is room for a few who speak their mind and call a spade a spade.
Macron is younger than Williamson
Give over. It's not even witty which would be the upside of a Boris premiership
We are then talking about Estonia. Now, I don't think the Russians are going to march in tomorrow morning; if they were serious about annexation (and I have no idea if they are), they would fund a political party in the country, gain support for it domestically and then at some point thereafter announce that they had been asked to help on account of the discrimination that party and its supporters were facing - a multi-year strategy).
I agree with the timetable being multi-year, but playing devil's advocate:
On 1/1/1938, Hitler and Germany hadn't done any foreign ventures yet. By 31/12/1939, Hitler had caused international crisis/land grabs over Czechoslovakia (twice Sept 1938, March 1939), Austria (once March 1938), Lithuania (once March 1939) and Poland (once Sept 1939). And he'd won all of them (well, perhaps not Poland as a long term goal).
It can probably be done faster, if Putin is minded to really push it.
Oh yes. Don't disagree but I also agree with @NeilH that his aim is to destabilise which necessarily makes his relative position stronger.
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
I agree - some of his answers were ok - but really Sec Defence? nope
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
ie be more dull. There are plenty of serious types in Cabinet, Hammond, Rudd, Liddington, of course May herself, there is room for a few who speak their mind and call a spade a spade.
Macron is younger than Williamson
Give over. It's not even witty which would be the upside of a Boris premiership
I prefer Boris to Williamson but as I said finding charisma in the Cabinet is from a very limited field
Um no. Unless May was planning on leaving NATO and abandoning the 800 British troops deployed to Estonia already, then there would certainly be a response.
Dura Ace can always be relied upon to b[out personal bias ahead of any real knowledge he might have.
Post Basra the prime (and possibly sole) directive for deployed British forces is what is coyly described as 'force protection'. If you think 800 British troops (of which probably only 150 won't be blanket stackers, dental hygienists, etc.) are a) going to halt Ivan or b) even try then you are simply wrong.
Article V or not, NATO is not going to start a war with Russia over Estonia. They are just not.
It would not just be British troops but French, German, Italian, Polish, Czech, Lithuanian, Latvian, Danish, American and Canadian troops too.
The core principle of NATO is that an attack on a NATO country is an attack on all NATO countries which is why Putin is unlikely to try it
Putin also knows what everyone else knows and that is that an incursion is gonna happen.
In the event of a full-scale invasion of a NATO country it almost certainly would with NATO forces being sent an masse to reinforce NATO forces already in Estonia as soon as the first Russian tank crossed the border
I doubt it. Where would it all come from and when, even if there was the will to do it?
But I applaud your championing of the resignation of our sovereignty to NATO.
Poland, the Czechs, the Latvians, the Lithuanians, the Turks, most of Western European NATO forces and US forces garrisoned in Europe before further US and Canadian reinforcements arrive
haha hahahaha hahahahahahahahahahaha
How many MBTs do the Latvians have?
The Germans and Poles have plenty which would be quickly sent to the Baltic States
Hague was the best Tory orator of his generation by far, Ed Miliband speeches make watching paint dry seem exciting
So do Gavin Williamson speeches. I find your view that he's charismatic utterly baffling; he's one of the dullest senior politicians I've ever heard.
Having attended a Gavin Williamson speech and Q&A I have to say not only has Gavin Williamson had a charisma bypass operation alongside a humour and emotional intelligence bypass.
Um no. Unless May was planning on leaving NATO and abandoning the 800 British troops deployed to Estonia already, then there would certainly be a response.
Dura Ace can always be relied upon to b[out personal bias ahead of any real knowledge he might have.
Post Basra the prime (and possibly sole) directive for deployed British forces is what is coyly described as 'force protection'. If you think 800 British troops (of which probably only 150 won't be blanket stackers, dental hygienists, etc.) are a) going to halt Ivan or b) even try then you are simply wrong.
Article V or not, NATO is not going to start a war with Russia over Estonia. They are just not.
It would not just be British troops but French, German, Italian, Polish, Czech, Lithuanian, Latvian, Danish, American and Canadian troops too.
The core principle of NATO is that an attack on a NATO country is an attack on all NATO countries which is why Putin is unlikely to try it
Putin also knows what everyone else knows and that is that an incursion is gonna happen.
In the event of a full-scale invasion der
I doubt it. Where would it all come from and when, even if there was the will to do it?
But I applaud your championing of the resignation of our sovereignty to NATO.
Poland, the Czechs, the Latvians, efore further US and Canadian reinforcements arrive
haha hahahaha hahahahahahahahahahaha
How many MBTs do the Latvians have?
The Germans and Poles have plenty which would be quickly sent to the Baltic States
Hague was the best Tory orator of his generation by far
Borrowing a phrase from Mr Freggles upthread "oh give over".
Hague was the worst Tory leader for centuries, treated as a complete joke figure by the electorate. Even IDS wasn't as bad as Hague in my view. It might have been different had he become leader say 10 years later.
Um no. Unless May was planning on leaving NATO and abandoning the 800 British troops deployed to Estonia already, then there would certainly be a response.
Dura Ace can always be relied upon to b[out personal bias ahead of any real knowledge he might have.
Post Basra the priy wrong.
Article V or not, NATO is not going to start a war with Russia over Estonia. They are just not.
It would not just be British troops but French, German, Italian, Polish, Czech, Lithuanian, Latvian, Danish, American and Canadian troops too.
The core principle of NATO is that an attack on a NATO country is an attack on all NATO countries which is why Putin is unlikely to try it
Putin also knows what everyone else knows and that is that an incursion is gonna happen.
In the event of a full-scale invasion der
I doubt it. Where would it all come from and when, even if there was the will to do it?
But I applaud your championing of the resignation of our sovereignty to NATO.
Poland, the Czechs, the Latvians, efore further US and Canadian reinforcements arrive
haha hahahaha hahahahahahahahahahaha
How many MBTs do the Latvians have?
The Germans and Poles have plenty which would be quickly sent to the Baltic States
Williamson may be a cross between Alan Partridge, Frank Spencer and Francis Underwood but he does at least have a bit of charisma. Not many you can say that about in the Cabinet apart from Boris and maybe Mourdaunt
I heard his press conference this morning and he comes over as very young and callow, (indeed he is younger than my youngest son) and his comment on Russia was wholly immature.
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
While the likes of Rory the tory never get the call...
Hard to believe Mrs May wants Gavin Williamson to succeed her and will do all in her power to make it happen.
She’s a fecking disgrace.
Doesn't every leader want their successor to be worse than them? Fair play to Tezzie - there are limited options for her in this regard, but she has managed to find one.
Comments
There's some discussion of numbers here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/7mm0mi/mainbattle_tanks_number_by_european_country_5000/
"quickly" ... LOL
I think we'd be relying on the airforce....
The only realistic option is to find a way of increasing spending on the military, on the foreign and diplomatic services, on the intelligence services, and on the BBC; whilst pursuing a policy of containing Russia and avoiding conflict, thus challenging the effectiveness of the regime, in the hope that Putin can be replaced. So, a more effective version of what we have been doing for the last ten years.
Of course, this then runs in to the problem that there would need to be major sacrificies in other areas of the domestic budget to support such a strategy, and there is no political will for that.
We are in a difficult spot. A looming crisis.
Not sure why you bothered 'not to get all Seamus Milne' by making the same point as Seamus Milne though. If you don't believe the government account that it is highly likely to have been Russia, or think its not certain enough to be so bold as to call it highly likely, there;s no crime in saying so.
Who is to say that she won't ?
If it were to happen, it would take a little time to establish the principles.
So chill pills all round, really. she has done enough to be going on with and I have no doubt there is more in the pipeline. We have to be clear that we are at all times constrained by the rule of law; the last thing we want to happen is for us to announce we are confiscating Chelsea FC, and some poxy lawyer standing up and saying yebbut you can't actually do that. We have to do things right, which takes time.
They think 2) was the reason that Ed never beat Dave on the best PM scores during that Parliament.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43415271
Seems that the French have fallen into line
http://www.bunkershield.co.uk/pricing-and-payment-options.php
Finlandisation, in cold war speak, but a more sinister version.
The time for passivity is well past. If we fail to act appropriately then the bully will return as they always do. Appeasement in any form is not an option.
NATO forces move to the Polish border in scale. Both sides bristle for a while followed by a negotiated withdrawal of some kind
Would the loss of the key figurehead mean that infighting would destroy the ruling elite and allow moderate forces to come to the fore - or is there someone even worse waiting in the wings?
Well I guess it is if the Shadow Home Secretary and her fellow travellers have previously called for the dismantling of our security services.
On 1/1/1938, Hitler and Germany hadn't done any foreign ventures yet.
By 31/12/1939, Hitler had caused international crisis/land grabs over Czechoslovakia (twice Sept 1938, March 1939), Austria (once March 1938), Lithuania (once March 1939) and Poland (once Sept 1939). And he'd won all of them (well, perhaps not Poland as a long term goal).
It can probably be done faster, if Putin is minded to really push it.
On the measures the UK government should take, @JackW's list is a good one but I'm not convinced that his more draconian approach would be wise at this stage. Obviously there will be tit-for-tat retaliation to anything we do, and we have significant economic interests in Russia (BP, Shell..). We could end up harming ourselves more than Putin.
Furthermore, some of the measures would require very active cooperation from our allies - for example, any attempt to change the World Cup arrangements would be a complete damp squib, and just make us look even weaker, if we didn't get full support from a good number of key nations.
For now, I think the government has got it about right, but the situation is not static so we'll have to see how things develop.
As for Corbyn: it is depressing to see apparently grown-up people making excuses for him.
(And BTW - I did tell y'all that Gavin Williamson was most unimpressive some months ago).
Need somewhere safe if Dore ever gets invaded by chavs or the working class.
Genuine question. Why would NATO/EU take the Polish border as the hard border? Surely it should be Latvia/Poland?
Not at all impressed - needs to grow up and mature
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43410816
Opponents have accused the former Scottish first minister of being a "useful idiot for the Kremlin".
But Mr Salmond insisted that the state-funded channel was not propaganda, and he had never been told what to say.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/974276383051583488
(I actually have no idea of its content, most of it might be fine, but I question his logic)
She’s a fecking disgrace.
Of course RT is part of a Russian propaganda exercise. Everyone knows it is.
"The maximum sentence a judge can impose for manslaughter is imprisonment for life.
The judge may impose other sentences, including a prison sentence to be served immediately, suspended
imprisonment or a community sentence."
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/FINAL-Manslaughter-sentencing-leaflet-for-web1.pdf
I can't get very excited about this. the judge had the significant advantage over you and me of having seen the Defendant and heard the evidence.
Macron is younger than Williamson
You have to wonder though if the sentence would have been more severe if she was say a black male and the other party was a white female.
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/03/stephen-hawking-tv-cameos-guest-roles-simpsons-big-bang-theory-futurama-star-trek
https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/974277753041244160
The victim inventing and setting up the stunt are whopping mitigating factors (Along with the stupidity of both of them).
This wasn't a prank involving someone scaring someone near a live rail which they might fall onto and die for instance - its more akin to vloggers that head up high buildings then fall off whilst trying to monetise gymnastics from the rooftops.
The victim was equally, if not more culpable in this one.
Hague was the best Tory orator of his generation by far, Ed Miliband speeches make watching paint dry seem exciting, Corbyn at least is an improvement for Labour on that score and knows how to hold an audience
Honestly - The Baltics are toast if Russia makes a serious move.
Hague was the worst Tory leader for centuries, treated as a complete joke figure by the electorate. Even IDS wasn't as bad as Hague in my view. It might have been different had he become leader say 10 years later.