leicsmac

They certainly do seem eager to trade. When it comes to energy infrastructure though, the methods don't bother me as much as the solution, for the rather simple reason that the penalty for not applying the solution is in all likelihood worse than any method to apply it could ever be.

Agreed. People can say what they like about the Chinese governmental method (and a lot of it may well be true), but on this matter they're setting the trend that the world really needs to follow. They're also exporting the tech to other places, as well. However, that also does carry the risk of a form of "soft imperialism" based on those places being in debt to the Chinese, so that needs to be considered, too.

Anyone who relies on fossil fuels for energy generation as the basis of their economy is not playing the long game well tbh. In that regard, civilisation changes, or civilisation collapses. And the clock is ticking.

And then you have a significant amount of the "global South" that don't have to use oil and gas for energy generation at all - thanks in large part to the Chinese. Which is not a bad thing because if the countries you speak of and elsewhere continue to use fossil fuels for that purpose, the only thing growing for them and for everyone else will be incidents of flooding, drought and other extreme weather, and the count of death and suffering. I wonder how useful their growing economy will be for them then. Our species really does have an issue with the long game, and it's deeply frustrating to see that and have a damn good idea of where it leads.

And even if it isn't Ukraine, it could - and likely will - be other places.

Agreed, but I guess we'll find out.

I find it difficult to see how such a crisis will be averted in the future at all to be honest, whether this or something else or a combination of factors causes it.

They tend to be except when Trump is directly involved, which is odd. In any case, it's way too early to tell how this will affect Reform going into election season in four years time, so much can happen between now and then. NB. WRT the farmers, I wonder if the help Reform would give them would include mitigation and prevention measures for the increasing incidents of extreme weather that I hear about causing massive problems from those same farmers on Countryfile every week.

The French stayed out of NATO for a lot of the Cold War and some of that was through The Moscow Criterion - you don't have to have a lot of nuclear weapons if you know the ones you have will get through and cause enough damage to make the bigger guy not use his. I would say that France and the UK do have that guarantee. Like you, I am interested in seeing what happens here beyond mere talk, though.

2nd consecutive new model Starship that became scrap metal not long after launch. Hopefully this isn't setting a trend.

Sadly, I think @bovril has it about right above. I would also add that British authoritarianism just takes a different form; genuflecting to "class", not the state. Think of the British class hierarchical history.

I wouldn't go as far as generalising that much regarding inherent qualities, but you make a good case.

The only similarity in governance between Putins Russia and the USSR is the semblance of absolute power concentrated near the top. Pretty much everything else about their guiding philosophy is different. Think Tsar Nicholas, not Stalin.

One of the core tenets of fascism is a Nietzschesque form of nihilism - if you can't be the best and dominate all others, then it's all for nothing and you are nothing too.

There should be no negotiation with someone so keen to use blackmail and so blatantly view people's lives and health as something expendable to be bought and sold. If he and his sycophants really want "America First", then they can have it. But in every possible matter, it will then be "America Only". Though they're the biggest global player, the isolation will hurt them more than the rest of the world. Edit: of course, if that happens the Russians won't turn him away and who knows what the Chinese might do, but hey.

It certainly isn't, which is why, in terms of foreign policy, it would be nice to have less of the same "might makes right" excuses for "diplomacy".

Well, yes, but pardon me for thinking there might be a third option rather than relying on realpolitik that causes nothing but suffering, Mr Kissinger. ... because, ultimately, they don't care about the democratic process if it doesn't serve their own self interest.

I find focusing on a singular objective - it doesn't have to be a big one - that does something to make the world around you better, helps. But that's just my take. The world is changing fast, and anyone with half a brain would be anxious about what may lie ahead, but all we can do is what lies in our own power.

The events that killed the dinosaurs, caused the Ordovincian-Silurian extinction event and reduced humanity to a mere handful of numbers 70000 years ago are not mysterious. Three different causes, all would happen no matter how well we take care of the Earth, all would require advanced technology, space based and/or otherwise, to even begin to stop or mitigate. They're as real as the very real problems of human suffering and biodiversity crash, to name but two. Focusing on the future makes sure that there will actually be one for any or all of us. Not planning for that is... well, asking for trouble. NB. I feel the same way about Musk and the privatisation of space exploration as you do - it's a recipe for dystopia. But the solution to that is to elect governments that do the same thing for the benefit of all, not abandon the matter entirely. You're a good person and I'm pretty damn sure you've done more for direct aid for people that need it than I have. However, I think the future will need people like both of us.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp3yew446k5o New Zealand has fired its most senior envoy to the United Kingdom over remarks that questioned US President Donald Trump's grasp of history. At an event in London on Tuesday, High Commissioner to the UK Phil Goff compared efforts to end the war between Russia and Ukraine to the Munich Agreement of 1938, which allowed Adolf Hitler to annex Czechoslovakia. Goff recalled how Sir Winston Churchill had criticised the agreement, then said of the US leader: "President Trump has restored the bust of Churchill to the Oval Office. But do you think he really understands history?" Apparently the diplomatic corps is no place to tell the truth, if a little bluntly.

He might hope for that but given the current attitude of the vast majority of the UK population towards the Repubs them winning in 2028 may have the opposite effect to what he wants.

We've got quite a few science bods on here, one reason I like FT so much is that it's a pretty broad church.

India are more familiar with the conditions and are at least the equal of NZ both batting and fielding. NZ can win depending on the day, but I'd make India favourites.

Saffers need to get a move on here if they're going to get close.

That may well be because the "young" see that those in and with power to really help change over the past few decades but have not done nearly enough as all "old". Unfortunately that then gets spun like all of the "old" think that way and have that power, which they don't. I agree that we're culpable for this as a species, not as demographics, and should the worst happen, those who are left and looking for someone to blame will certainly see it that way too.