General News

[fox_favourite]

9 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Agree ceasefire

Hug it out for a year

Regroup

Fabricate Ukrainian breach of terms

Invade again with no US support to Ukraine. 

This is sadly what will happen. Putin will use Trumps horrendous ego in his favour, which then I can see a false flag happens and Ukraine gets hits harder. 

 

Trump washes his hands and say "not my fault and nothing to do with us" attitude. 

 

Honestly there had to some in the population the size of America that is better than this. It's almost the American people don't connect it to reality and it's just a reality show to some of them. 

Edited 12 February by fox_favourite

[the fox]

So, the 10s of billions and the thousands upon thousands of people dead just for it to end like this? Why instigate Ukraine by promising a NATO membership (unwise idea btw)? When will people wake up to reality? The bankers got their money, the military-industrial complexe's pockets got deeper whilst trying out their new and shiny weapons, the EU's "investment" is down the drain and Ukraine is drained and in debt.

 

Allowing the USA to have even more leverage on UK politics and economy (like mandelson wants) will kill any sovereignty left for the United Kingdom. The USA doesn't want allies, it wants expendable states under it.  

[Jon the Hat]

The major European powers need to seriously up their Military spending now, if not sooner.  4-5% I think at least, else we are going to seriously regret it.  The US is no longer willing to fund our defense for us, that much is clear.

[Muzzy_no7]

8 hours ago, Lionator said:

Today has been truly awful for Ukraine. A terrible missile attack on Kyiv this morning followed by the US Secretary of Defense categorically ruling out then joining nato, Tulsi gabbard getting confirmed and now the final nail in the coffin with Trump and Putin’s collusion. The dying will likely soon stop in Ukraine but they have been sold down the river. Awful. 

Do you have another solution?

[Muzzy_no7]

On 12/02/2025 at 01:02, Jon the Hat said:

Labour will improve over the next few years and probably win a second term, so no indeed she has sod all chance even if she does fight that election.  Good chance Tories and Reform merge though after that out of necessity.  The right finally has the same problem of split vote that the left has had since the 70s.

Next election will be a hung parliament, no doubt about it. 
 

Cant see a Conservative- Reform Alliance getting over the line due to the voting system. Share may well be enough, but not the amount of seats. 

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Next election will be a hung parliament, no doubt about it. 
 

Cant see a Conservative- Reform Alliance getting over the line due to the voting system. Share may well be enough, but not the amount of seats. 

Labour have plenty of time to learn on the job.

[Lionator]

3 hours ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Do you have another solution?

Give them the weapons they need?

[leicsmac]

Oddly enough, it may in fact be possible to be a reasonably influential nation power without having enough firepower to blow up the world - unless those others that do it are wrong, too.

 

8 hours ago, Dunge said:

I mean, that is basically the “Cross your fingers” option.

Given that all the others also ignore the vast drop in resource availability on the horizon and closing fast that will require massive fast technological adaptability across the world or outright warfare, I think every option henceforth is "cross your fingers".

[SecretPro]

4 hours ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Next election will be a hung parliament, no doubt about it. 
 

Cant see a Conservative- Reform Alliance getting over the line due to the voting system. Share may well be enough, but not the amount of seats. 

What a revolting thought.

[leicsmac]

9 hours ago, Bilo said:

It won't change for the Tories until they realise that trying to be Reform with policies written in pen rather than crayon is a fool's errand. 

 

They'd be much better served leaving Reform to hoover up the angry right-wing vote and going after B-C2 voters in the Midlands and North from Labour and trying to win back middle-class voters from the Lib Dems in the south. The more they try to stem the flow of CON-REF switchers, the less chance they have of winning back the median floating voters. 

As per above, FPTP will mean you're likely right there - Tories and Reform combined would get plenty of votes, but not enough seats.

 

But four years is a long time. Who thought last time round it would go from a Boris 80 seat majority to a Starmer 170 seat landslide in roughly that time?

 

9 hours ago, fox_favourite said:

This is sadly what will happen. Putin will use Trumps horrendous ego in his favour, which then I can see a false flag happens and Ukraine gets hits harder. 

 

Trump washes his hands and say "not my fault and nothing to do with us" attitude. 

 

Honestly there had to some in the population the size of America that is better than this. It's almost the American people don't connect it to reality and it's just a reality show to some of them. 

I think it's more that only things immediately in their own line of sight and affecting them are "real" to them - the suffering of strangers is abstract.

 

Understandable, but not excusable, given the consequences of that thought process when put into policy.

[Bilo]

4 hours ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Next election will be a hung parliament, no doubt about it. 
 

Cant see a Conservative- Reform Alliance getting over the line due to the voting system. Share may well be enough, but not the amount of seats. 

My best guess is that the next election will be like 1983.

 

Thatcher and her government were about as popular as a hog roast at a Bar Mitzvah for the first three years, and their vote share actually fell in the 1983 election- even after the Falklands.

 

What won it for the Tories was the centre and left being completely split between the SDP-Liberal Alliance and Labour. Put their vote share together and they get over 50% of the popular vote and Thatcher is now remembered as a radical, but grossly unpopular, one-term PM. 

 

As mentioned earlier on this thread, the right-wing vote is now split in the same way that the left-wing vote has been for years. The difference is that the Overton Window encompasses far more 'right of Tories' than 'left of Labour,' which is why the Greens and other left-wing parties have never gained the kind of leverage and momentum that Reform have. 

 

Labour will lose seats for sure next time out, and Reform will gain a decent number, but I'd say that the Parliamentary maths and FPTP points to Starmer getting a smaller, but still very workable, majority in 2029. Probably similar to that which Blair got in 2005 despite it being his third term and the absolute quagmire of Iraq still raging on.

[ajthefox]

It's 4 and a half years away.

 

I'm amazed any one thinks they know what is to come and what the GE will be like.

[urban.spaceman]

15 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

It's 4 and a half years away.

 

I'm amazed any one thinks they know what is to come and what the GE will be like.

I would make a prediction and say 'bookmark this' but we all know this thread will never survive until 2029  

[brookfox]

7 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

The major European powers need to seriously up their Military spending now, if not sooner.  4-5% I think at least, else we are going to seriously regret it.  The US is no longer willing to fund our defense for us, that much is clear.

Up to a point I can’t blame them. We’re not in a great state, but last few times I’ve been to the US the levels of homelessness and drug abuse has left me seriously upset. It needs funding, so can’t blame them for wanting to look after their own a bit more and not be big brother to the world.

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, brookfox said:

Up to a point I can’t blame them. We’re not in a great state, but last few times I’ve been to the US the levels of homelessness and drug abuse has left me seriously upset. It needs funding, so can’t blame them for wanting to look after their own a bit more and not be big brother to the world.

The US hasn't made any kind of effort to address domestic policy since the 1960's, regardless of military spending.

 

If they somehow choose to abandon their ideal of rugged individualism/social Darwinism and address it now no matter what they do in terms of foreign policy, I'd be shocked.

[Bilo]

29 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

It's 4 and a half years away.

 

I'm amazed any one thinks they know what is to come and what the GE will be like.

Politics is always inherently unpredictable, but I would say that FPTP bakes in a lot more certainty than, say, PR. Realistically, in terms of polling, Labour have hit their floor. There's no chance that they go below 25% in a General Election because the 'left of Labour' options are extremely limited and those who are going to go right of Labour probably already have. It's less certain for the Tories because of Reform, but I do suspect they'll do better if they're sensible to get a leader who wasn't involved intimately with the last government and isn't a right-wing headbanger trying to be Reform-lite.

[Sampson]

12 hours ago, bovril said:

Hesgeth said "it will require our European allies to step into the arena and take ownership of conventional security on the continent". Which we've known was on the horizon for a while, and which I agree with, but still a huge shift. And yet I'm not sure it will make a huge ripple in Britain or Europe right now. 

Agree. 
 

Non-Russia/Belarus/Turkey Europe seriously needs to up its military spending and form a separate alliance right now. 
 

Starmer needs to seriously stop pandering to the Reform and Tory Brexiteers and actually get close to the EU on defence, it’s clear as day the US doesn’t care about Europe anymore and if anything arguably sides with Russia over Western Europe. Starmer needs to grow a backbone and realise the EU is by far our closest and most important ally right now and regardless of what Farage or Rees-Mogg crow about rejoining the EU every time he talks to them, it’s clear on defence we need to be a hell of a lot closer with them and he can’t keep spouting this “we can be close to both allies” while being close and making commitments to neither. 

[kenny]

5 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Agree. 
 

Non-Russia/Belarus/Turkey Europe seriously needs to up its military spending and form a separate alliance right now. 
 

Starmer needs to seriously stop pandering to the Reform and Tory Brexiteers and actually get close to the EU on defence, it’s clear as day the US doesn’t care about Europe anymore and if anything arguably sides with Russia over Western Europe. Starmer needs to grow a backbone and realise the EU is by far our closest and most important ally right now and regardless of what Farage or Rees-Mogg crow about rejoining the EU every time he talks to them, it’s clear on defence we need to be a hell of a lot closer with them and he can’t keep spouting this “we can be close to both allies” while being close and making commitments to neither. 

If it wasn't for the UK and the USA leading Europe on Ukraine, there wouldn't be a Ukraine anymore.

 

A dig about our relations with the EU is fine, but we have been a leader in Europe throughout this conflict. You only have to see how much Germanys position has changed from not being willing to help at the start of the invasion to being one of the biggest donators of military hardware now to see that. 

[Sampson]

10 minutes ago, kenny said:

If it wasn't for the UK and the USA leading Europe on Ukraine, there wouldn't be a Ukraine anymore.

 

A dig about our relations with the EU is fine, but we have been a leader in Europe throughout this conflict. You only have to see how much Germanys position has changed from not being willing to help at the start of the invasion to being one of the biggest donators of military hardware now to see that. 

I’m not disagreeing that UK has been probably the biggest donar in that regard, my point is about relations when Putin inevitably starts turning the pressure on again a few months after the cease fire that seems like it’s coming. So many in the Uk and the rest of Europe don’t want to accept it, but it’s extremely clear the US is cutting ties with its alliances with Europe and is arguably even hostile towards them now, they’ve been extremely open about that. At which point it’s essential that Western and Central Europe create a strong alliance if they want to stand any chance of standing up to Russia.  
 

The problem is politically UK is still in the blowback of Brexit despite that being a pre-Russia-Ukraine war and the world and Europe have changed dramatically since 2016, so Starmer is so hesitant to commit to anything as as soon as he even talks to French or German leaders you get Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg harking up that it’s a betrayal of Brexit (and they seem to want to become a heel to the US and Trump instead). So Starmer continues to try this weak fence sitting and commit to  neither strategy on are alliances with the US and EU.

Edited 13 February by Sampson

[kenny]

3 minutes ago, Sampson said:

I’m not disagreeing that UK has been probably the biggest donar in that regard, my point is about relations when Putin inevitably starts turning the pressure on again a few months after the cease fire that seems like it’s coming. So many in the Uk and the rest of Europe don’t want to accept it, but it’s extremely clear the US is cutting ties with its alliances with Europe and is arguably even hostile towards them now, they’ve been extremely open about that. At which point it’s essential that Western and Central Europe create a strong alliance if they want to stand any chance of standing up to Russia.  
 

The problem is politically UK is still in the blowback of Brexit despite that being a pre-Russia-Ukraine war and the world and Europe have changed dramatically since 2016, so Starmer is so hesitant to commit to anything as as soon as he even talks to French or German leaders you get Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg harking up that it’s a betrayal of Brexit (and they seem to want to become a heel to the US and Trump instead). So Starmer continues to try this weak fence sitting and commit to  neither strategy on are alliances with the US and EU.

The second paragraph isn't true. Rees-Mogg has used the UKs position as a global leader as an example of the success of Brexit. He has said that not being forced to follow France and Germanys lead at the start allowed the UK to offer support that wasn't forthcoming from the EU.

 

This is nonsense of course as the EU is not a defence alliance, even if many Eurocrats want it to be. 

 

Also worth mentioning to contradict you further, that Germany has now donated more than the UK and is second to the USA. It was slow to arrive due to Germany's friendliness to Russia at the start. France has been fairly unresponsive in terms of donating hardware, presumably due to Macron.

[Sampson]

2 minutes ago, kenny said:

The second paragraph isn't true. Rees-Mogg has used the UKs position as a global leader as an example of the success of Brexit. He has said that not being forced to follow France and Germanys lead at the start allowed the UK to offer support that wasn't forthcoming from the EU.

 

This is nonsense of course as the EU is not a defence alliance, even if many Eurocrats want it to be. 

 

Also worth mentioning to contradict you further, that Germany has now donated more than the UK and is second to the USA. It was slow to arrive due to Germany's friendliness to Russia at the start. France has been fairly unresponsive in terms of donating hardware, presumably due to Macron.

I was basing on recent talks with Starmer in Brussels in which nothing was even agreed or barely talked about, Rees-Mogg came out on twitter with an angry post saying we can’t go under the yolk (sic) of the EU. I would be extremely surprised if even any sniff of a defence alliance across Europe didn’t have Farage and Rees-Mogg coming out extremely strongly claiming it was some back door agreement of going back into the EU.

The EU is not officially a defence alliance no but it inherently kind of breaks down if internal states go to war as you’d have to create customs and immigration borders in such cases on security grounds to stop weapons and spies going into each others countries. It is almost all part of NATO which the US clearly no longer cares for. So it is in principle a defacto defence alliance and you would very much expect EU countries to defend each other. 
 

Again, I’m not sure how that’s contradicting me. If that’s true I’m glad Germany has upped its budget, I’m not saying they haven’t upped their budget, I’m saying I think in general the UK, Germany, France, Poland, Italy etc. all need to form a concrete defensive alliance and built up their militaries in that face of Russian aggression and US apathy over the next few years.  

[Nalis]

It's going to be epic when Trump and Musk eventually fall out

[ClaphamFox]

On 24/01/2025 at 10:22, Sampson said:

It was interesting reading about the Netherlands and euthanasia during the recent debate on assisted dying in the uk and how it’s become a clear example of legal creep because it’s so hard to define who should be eligible of it and who shouldn’t because cases can be so different. I do think people should be allowed the choice to die but it was a totally valid argument about legal creep in assisted dying law and it’s exactly the same concerns I have about the death penalty. 

The Assisted Dying Bill is evolving into something even more sinister and dangerous than I originally feared. Here, Kim Leadbetter admits that people will be able to choose to be killed simply because they fear they are a financial burden. The Bill Committee has also refused amendments to exclude people with impaired judgement, the depressed and suicidal, prisoners and homeless people and those 'unduly influenced' by others. This is a absolutely vile piece of legislation and it will be a very dark day for this country if it is passed.

 

https://x.com/danny__kruger/status/1889746288767361451

Edited 13 February by ClaphamFox

[kenny]

20 minutes ago, Sampson said:

I was basing on recent talks with Starmer in Brussels in which nothing was even agreed or barely talked about, Rees-Mogg came out on twitter with an angry post saying we can’t go under the yolk (sic) of the EU. I would be extremely surprised if even any sniff of a defence alliance across Europe didn’t have Farage and Rees-Mogg coming out extremely strongly claiming it was some back door agreement of going back into the EU.

The EU is not officially a defence alliance no but it inherently kind of breaks down if internal states go to war as you’d have to create customs and immigration borders in such cases on security grounds to stop weapons and spies going into each others countries. It is almost all part of NATO which the US clearly no longer cares for. So it is in principle a defacto defence alliance and you would very much expect EU countries to defend each other. 
 

Again, I’m not sure how that’s contradicting me. If that’s true I’m glad Germany has upped its budget, I’m not saying they haven’t upped their budget, I’m saying I think in general the UK, Germany, France, Poland, Italy etc. all need to form a concrete defensive alliance and built up their militaries in that face of Russian aggression and US apathy over the next few years.  

The EU nations have political will not to upset each other but on defence can make their own decisions. If we hadn't left the EU I don't think the course of the war would have been any different.

 

Talking to the EU about the future of Ukraine would be frustrating as the decision making process is cumbersome and I decisive. In terms of defence, Starmer will be talking to the individual leaders about continuing to support the Ukraine but he can't influence whether it will get EU membership which is where I suspect the dithering has come from. It's also not much to do with us whether they are members or not.

[leicsmac]

35 minutes ago, kenny said:

The second paragraph isn't true. Rees-Mogg has used the UKs position as a global leader as an example of the success of Brexit. He has said that not being forced to follow France and Germanys lead at the start allowed the UK to offer support that wasn't forthcoming from the EU.

 

This is nonsense of course as the EU is not a defence alliance, even if many Eurocrats want it to be. 

 

Also worth mentioning to contradict you further, that Germany has now donated more than the UK and is second to the USA. It was slow to arrive due to Germany's friendliness to Russia at the start. France has been fairly unresponsive in terms of donating hardware, presumably due to Macron.

Does the UK really have the capacity to stand on its own in the way described here for any length of time?

 

17 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

The Assisted Dying Bill is evolving into something even more sinister and dangerous than I originally feared. Here, Kim Leadbetter admits that people will be able to choose to be killed simply because they fear they are a financial burden. The Bill Committee has also refused amendments to exclude people with impaired judgement, the depressed and suicidal, prisoners and homeless people and those 'unduly influenced' by others. This is a absolutely vile piece of legislation and it will be a very dark day for this country if it is passed.

 

https://x.com/danny__kruger/status/1889746288767361451

If this legislation is not going to/ doesn't deserve to pass, I'm hoping that solutions for better palliative care are going to be included with that, because otherwise we end up with a situation for many families that is equally as painful as what is described here.