Also In The News

[MC Prussian]

47 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/oct/10/us-mayors-seek-to-bypass-trump-with-direct-role-at-un-climate-talks

Some good news.

LA mayor Garcetti... Leader of the city with one of the worst crime, homelessness and poverty records in the country. Add to that heavy debts, illegal immigration, drugs, gang activity, pollution, and a recent outbreak of major diseases unheard of in the 21st century.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/03/typhus-tuberculosis-medieval-diseases-spreading-homeless/584380/

 

Maybe he should take care of his own city first.

 

On a sidenote, the C40 summit includes San Francisco, LA, Boston, Austin, Chicago, Houston, New Orleans, New York, Portland, Philadelphia, Seattle and Washington, DC.

Out of these twelve US cities, all are Democrat-led.

No Republicans, no Independents... 

 

 

[treer]

8 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

No Republicans, no Independents

by the sound of it, they would be in a right mess if they had

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, MC Prussian said:

On a sidenote, the C40 summit includes San Francisco, LA, Boston, Austin, Chicago, Houston, New Orleans, New York, Portland, Philadelphia, Seattle and Washington, DC.

Out of these twelve US cities, all are Democrat-led.

No Republicans, no Independents... 

 

 

Well, it does show which side of the aisle is taking climate policy more seriously for the time being.

[MC Prussian]

29 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Well, it does show which side of the aisle is taking climate policy more seriously for the time being.

It's not clear to me how you become a member of the C40. The application process seems to be a bit vague:

Can any city apply and receive membership status automatically? Who decides who's in and who's not? 

 

Out of the 50 largest cities in the US, 33 are Democrat-led, 14 Republican and 3 Independent. That's about a 11:5:1 ratio.

Odd not to find a single Republican-dominated US city as part of the panel.

 

Turns out Republican mayors are active in climate policy, just on another level:

https://energytransition.org/2018/07/many-republican-mayors-are-advancing-climate-friendly-policies-without-saying-so/

Edited 12 October 2019 by MC Prussian

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

It's not clear to me how you become a member of the C40. The application process seems to be a bit vague:

Can any city apply and receive membership status automatically? Who decides who's in and who's not? 

 

Out of the 50 largest cities in the US, 33 are Democrat-led, 14 Republican and 3 Independent. That's about a 11:5:1 ratio.

Odd not to find a single Republican-dominated US city as part of the panel.

 

Turns out Republican mayors are active in climate policy, just on another level:

https://energytransition.org/2018/07/many-republican-mayors-are-advancing-climate-friendly-policies-without-saying-so/

Interesting read, thank you.

 

It's a shame that the Repub mayors doing this feel that they can't raise their voices a little more and join the party - more bipartisan support for these initiatives could only be a good thing - but I guess they feel they have to frame things as economic and pollution-reducing and fly under the radar to get these things done in the first place.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50032290

 

What's the point in bodycam footage if it can be edited/tampered with before it is seen by a separate authority?

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50029540

 

Attack the Kurds, let the IS militants loose. Great move, Erdogan.

[Guest MattP]

13 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50032290

 

What's the point in bodycam footage if it can be edited/tampered with before it is seen by a separate authority?

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50029540

 

Attack the Kurds, let the IS militants loose. Great move, Erdogan.

Erdogan is an Islamic fundamentalist himself - we are talking about a person here who used the NZ terror attack video at a political rally and threatens to flood Europe with refugees unless he gets what he wants, he is the most dangerous man in the World to our continent. 

 

I said a year or so ago I wish people in the West were as upset about people like him as they were about Trump - nothing has changed my mind about that.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

Erdogan is an Islamic fundamentalist himself - we are talking about a person here who used the NZ terror attack video at a political rally and threatens to flood Europe with refugees unless he gets what he wants, he is the most dangerous man in the World to our continent. 

 

I said a year or so ago I wish people in the West were as upset about people like him as they were about Trump - nothing has changed my mind about that.

I'd posit that Trump has the potential to be worse/more dangerous because of the sheer power the US possesses...but in terms of clear and present threat, yes, I agree wholeheartedly.

 

The sooner he no longer has power, the better.

[Guest MattP]

13 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'd posit that Trump has the potential to be worse/more dangerous because of the sheer power the US possesses...but in terms of clear and present threat, yes, I agree wholeheartedly.

 

The sooner he no longer has power, the better.

Potential maybe, but Trump appears to be anti-war as it comes from the evidence we have.

[leicsmac]

31 minutes ago, MattP said:

Potential maybe, but Trump appears to be anti-war as it comes from the evidence we have.

I'm not entirely convinced that will remain true, but yes, for the time being potential is all it is.

 

(You could make an argument about his domestic and science policy too but quite frankly the Chinese outscore them in terms of nastiness there, at least in scale.)

[bovril]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

Erdogan is an Islamic fundamentalist himself - we are talking about a person here who used the NZ terror attack video at a political rally and threatens to flood Europe with refugees unless he gets what he wants, he is the most dangerous man in the World to our continent. 

 

I said a year or so ago I wish people in the West were as upset about people like him as they were about Trump - nothing has changed my mind about that.

I don't know what you're basing that on to be honest. I would guess with some confidence that Europeans would choose Turkey over the US as the greater threat to stability in the region. 

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

I'd posit that Trump has the potential to be worse/more dangerous because of the sheer power the US possesses...but in terms of clear and present threat, yes, I agree wholeheartedly.

 

The sooner he no longer has power, the better.

Why are we putting so much emphasis on the US and what they're doing or not doing when it comes to Turkey and the Kurds/Syria?

 

I mean, where's the criticism of the EU and the European nations within NATO for not interfering, where's the condemnation of the invasion? They are much closer to Turkey than the US are. They should be held accountable for this failure, too. If not more.

[WigstonWanderer]

13 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Why are we putting so much emphasis on the US and what they're doing or not doing when it comes to Turkey and the Kurds/Syria?

 

I mean, where's the criticism of the EU and the European nations within NATO for not interfering, where's the condemnation of the invasion? They are much closer to Turkey than the US are. They should be held accountable for this failure, too. If not more.

I think they’re scared of the 3.6m

[leicsmac]

40 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Why are we putting so much emphasis on the US and what they're doing or not doing when it comes to Turkey and the Kurds/Syria?

 

I mean, where's the criticism of the EU and the European nations within NATO for not interfering, where's the condemnation of the invasion? They are much closer to Turkey than the US are. They should be held accountable for this failure, too. If not more.

Because, quite frankly, the US have so much more diplomatic power than the EU on this score because they carry by far the biggest stick, and stick is the only language Erdogan seems to understand.

 

I'd certainly agree a blanket condemnation would be a good thing, but I don't see how the EU can be especially accountable for something that it was never in their power to stop in the first place.

[oxford blue]

4 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

Why are we putting so much emphasis on the US and what they're doing or not doing when it comes to Turkey and the Kurds/Syria?

 

The answer is this: Trump talks to Erdogan on the phene, agrees to withdraw US troops from Norhtern Syria. Unsurprisingly, Erdogan sees this as a green light to pour troops in and bomb the Kurds (who were the key allies in defeating IS). Trump's decision came as a surprise others in his own admnistration, let alone NATO allies. Not for the first time he seemingly makes up policy on the spur of the moment, without any thought of the consequences.

[WigstonWanderer]

1 hour ago, oxford blue said:

The answer is this: Trump talks to Erdogan on the phene, agrees to withdraw US troops from Norhtern Syria. Unsurprisingly, Erdogan sees this as a green light to pour troops in and bomb the Kurds (who were the key allies in defeating IS). Trump's decision came as a surprise others in his own admnistration, let alone NATO allies. Not for the first time he seemingly makes up policy on the spur of the moment, without any thought of the consequences.

This should demonstrate to everyone what a thoroughly poor and unreliable ally the US really is, particularly under Trump.

[Lionator]

8 hours ago, MattP said:

Erdogan is an Islamic fundamentalist himself - we are talking about a person here who used the NZ terror attack video at a political rally and threatens to flood Europe with refugees unless he gets what he wants, he is the most dangerous man in the World to our continent. 

 

I said a year or so ago I wish people in the West were as upset about people like him as they were about Trump - nothing has changed my mind about that.

He faked a military coup in order to tighten his grip on his country. The guy is an absolute psychopath. Unfortunately given the might of America, Trump's move to pull out of Syria will be the root of the dire situation of what's to come.

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, oxford blue said:

The answer is this: Trump talks to Erdogan on the phene, agrees to withdraw US troops from Norhtern Syria. Unsurprisingly, Erdogan sees this as a green light to pour troops in and bomb the Kurds (who were the key allies in defeating IS). Trump's decision came as a surprise others in his own admnistration, let alone NATO allies. Not for the first time he seemingly makes up policy on the spur of the moment, without any thought of the consequences.

Trump hasn't pulled all troops out of Syria. Surely there are other nations involved, as well? Troops that could make a much bigger impact than the 100 remaining US soldiers.

How many UK and French contingencies are still down there?

[Jon the Hat]

Much as I sympathise with the parents of Harry Dunn for the tragic loss of their son, I am not sure the daily update every time they speak to the media is actually news.

 

She is not going to come back, whatever you do or say.  Firstly it would not be a sensible thing for anyone to do in the situation she is now in, and secondly the US Government won't want her to either;  having the family of those you post overseas imprisoned is not a good look for them.

 

 

[leicsmac]

10 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Much as I sympathise with the parents of Harry Dunn for the tragic loss of their son, I am not sure the daily update every time they speak to the media is actually news.

 

She is not going to come back, whatever you do or say.  Firstly it would not be a sensible thing for anyone to do in the situation she is now in, and secondly the US Government won't want her to either;  having the family of those you post overseas imprisoned is not a good look for them.

 

 

Much as I agree on the realities of the situation, I hope this gets pushed as much as possible just so people can really get an idea of just how reprehensible the idea of such "collateral damage" in the name of realpolitik is (and at the very end of it, that is exactly what this is.) Maybe then more people might then start to push against that idea itself.

[Alf Bentley]

I have distinctly mixed feelings about the idea of Catalan independence, but this surely isn't going to help in Spain:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49974289

 

"Spain's Supreme Court has sentenced nine Catalan separatist leaders to between nine and 13 years in prison for sedition over their role in an independence referendum in 2017.

Some of those sentenced had held prominent positions in Catalonia's government and parliament, while others were influential activists and cultural advocates."

[Jon the Hat]

20 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Much as I agree on the realities of the situation, I hope this gets pushed as much as possible just so people can really get an idea of just how reprehensible the idea of such "collateral damage" in the name of realpolitik is (and at the very end of it, that is exactly what this is.) Maybe then more people might then start to push against that idea itself.

I’m not sure I agree really.  It was an accident after all.  There is no suggestion she was drunk or anything.  It would be daft to break diplomatic immunity for such a case.

Edited 14 October 2019 by Jon the Hat

[MC Prussian]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Much as I agree on the realities of the situation, I hope this gets pushed as much as possible just so people can really get an idea of just how reprehensible the idea of such "collateral damage" in the name of realpolitik is (and at the very end of it, that is exactly what this is.) Maybe then more people might then start to push against that idea itself.

Colliding with a motorcyclist on the wrong side of the road in another country in a tragic accident is hardly "collateral damage in the name of "Realpolitik"".

To go to such great lengths in order to justify your own bias...

What you do is just adding to some of the media's own twisted stance that the US are a bad place with bad people living in it, led by a bad president.

Which is a gross overstatement. There's some truth to it, but it's not THE truth.

 

Hers was a cowardly action emboldened by the fact she's protected by diplomatic immunity. She's a horrible human being for fleeing. Nothing more, nothing less.
If she had been part of any other embassy/diplomatic community in the UK other than London, she'd have been persecuted in the UK. But RAF Croughton has a special deal in place, sadly. Lucky for her.

 

Btw, the Dunns may still be able to file a civil lawsuit, so there is hope for some justice on that level.

 

Edited 14 October 2019 by MC Prussian

[Alf Bentley]

3 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I’m not sure I agree really.  It was an accident after all.

 

No suggestion that it was deliberate, but there can be an element of culpability in accidents.

 

There's been talk that she was driving on the wrong side of the road and had been for some distance.

If that's true, I presume the police/CPS would consider a charge of causing death by dangerous/careless driving (not murder/manslaughter)? Though there might be no grounds or insufficient evidence.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

I’m not sure I agree really.  It was an accident after all.  There is no suggestion she was drunk or anything.  It would be daft to break diplomatic immunity for such a case.

It pretty much squarely fits the description of culpable manslaughter (or at the very least death by dangerous driving) from what we know of the information so far.

 

As far as I'm concerned, diplomatic immunity extends way too far now and is used far too often simply to cover arses in situations like this - and it seems that the only reason that nations protect their diplomats in such situations is because of realpolitik (can't have one of our own answering to those pesky foreigners, we'd lose face and power!) and those that die as a result of it are, once you strip it down, collateral damage. That's why I used the terminology as I did.

 

Unless bringing someone before a court in another country would directly and without doubt compromise more lives or more materially than has been taken by that person (that's if they're a spook or have other kinds of valuable secrets that could come out in the wash or something), that someone should not be protected by their government if they commit a crime IMO - and that they often are is down to nothing more than one nation-state feeling they have to have one-up on another. That is true of almost all the big players and most of the smaller ones, too.

 

It's a system that is rotten to the core and needs to change - not to the point that the great games can't go on, but at least so cases like this can see some justice rather than simply being written off as they way things happen.

 

57 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Driving over a citizen in another country in a tragic accident is hardly "collateral damage in the name of "Realpolitik"".

To go to such great lengths in order to justify your own bias...

What you do is just adding to some of the media's own twisted stance that the US are a bad place with bad people living in it, led by a bad president.

Which is a gross overstatement. There's some truth to it, but it's not THE truth.

 

Hers was a cowardly action emboldened by the fact she's protected by diplomatic immunity. She's a horrible human being for fleeing. Nothing more, nothing less.
If she had been part of any other embassy/diplomatic community in the UK other than London, she'd have been persecuted in the UK. But RAF Croughton has a special deal in place, sadly. Lucky for her.

 

Btw, the Dunns may still be able to file a civil lawsuit, so there is hope for some justice on that level.

 

I'm sorry but you've got the wrong end of the stick here, sorry for not being clearer. The current administration of the US draws my ire in many ways, but they themselves have absolutely zilch to do with this one, and I wholeheartedly agree with your second paragraph. I'd say the same about the situation regardless of the nationality of the diplomat - even if it was a UK one doing a runner after knocking over a child somewhere else in the world.

 

As to exactly why I think the system is terrible, look above to my reply to Jon.

 

I do hope the Dunns can get at least some measure of justice from all this.

Edited 14 October 2019 by leicsmac