General News

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Since when has Second Lady been a thing.

 

Surely it's the equivalent of a visit from Mr Reeves, whoever he is?

No idea.

 

In any case, it's good to see that the Greenlanders, Danish and most other folks outside a particular breed in the US not buying into any of it.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Md9 said:

With all of the nonsense going on they should do it really wind them up more. Every time they talk it’s just crap that comes out of their mouths 

" If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu, The Art of War

[Spiritwalker]

2 hours ago, Lionator said:

The whole purpose of that article was saying that he got carried away and said stuff without doing it. It’s classic Labour under Starmer, say something to give you a (+2) in the opinion polls and worry about the impact later on.

Fair enough, I couldn’t read the article.

[bovril]

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

What do you mean “current form”? I’m talking about basic ideas of separation of powers with separate authorities and a civil service, ideas the governments and leaders have to obey the law just like everyone else, rights of protest and criticism of government and international institutions designed to make countries work together. I think economic ideals and capitalism have stopped working since 2008, but that’s very different from liberal democracy and it’s a poor excuse to beg for authoritarianism and nationalism.
 

The alternative is authoritarianism and nationalism and a wholly centralised form of governance which means giving 1 or 2 person at the top of a country absolute power to do what they like and giving those countries the power to invade and dictate what they like to smaller countries . And if that stops working, well then good luck trying to get that changed without getting yourself thrown in prison, kicked out and banished from the country or worse. 

I think the point is that the world is a lot messier now, particularly because it's so interconnected, and so things like nationalism or strong leaders who are above the law start to appeal more. I've posted this before but I don't think Brits resisted authoritarianism when others didn't because of something intrinsic in our character but because we were more successful than 99% of other countries. That's not the case now obviously. 

[Jattdogg]

4 hours ago, Md9 said:

Vance sending his wife because he knows no one out side of America like him no doubt. Shame they just don’t block them all entering the country with the way they have been talking about them 

 

 

4 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Since when has Second Lady been a thing.

 

Surely it's the equivalent of a visit from Mr Reeves, whoever he is?

Always been a thing however, with Melania being an absent first lady, someone has to fill the void.  Perhaps they are hoping her curry skills might mean an ethnic meal opportunity to rope them in. Who doesn't love a curry chicken? 

 

Would love to see them dent entry but they won't for fear of trump losing his shit on them.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cg70xgxl3vmt

 

The White House confirms that a journalist was inadvertently added to a group chat where senior US officials discussed plans for a strike against the Houthi rebel group

 

Whoops.

 

"At one point in the thread the JD Vance account, the name of the vice-president, griped that the strikes would benefit the Europeans, because of their reliance on those shipping lanes, adding: "I just hate bailing Europe out again."

The user identified as Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary, responded three minutes later: "VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It's PATHETIC.""

 

As if there was any more proof needed of what this administration thinks of Europe and the UK.

Edited 25 March by leicsmac

[Zear0]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cg70xgxl3vmt

 

The White House confirms that a journalist was inadvertently added to a group chat where senior US officials discussed plans for a strike against the Houthi rebel group

 

Whoops.

 

"At one point in the thread the JD Vance account, the name of the vice-president, griped that the strikes would benefit the Europeans, because of their reliance on those shipping lanes, adding: "I just hate bailing Europe out again."

The user identified as Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary, responded three minutes later: "VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It's PATHETIC.""

 

As if there was any more proof needed of what this administration thinks of Europe and the UK.

Wondered what the tactic on responding to this would be and Hesgeth has made his decision to go the gaslighting approach.  It never happened, plans, what plans?

[whoareyaaa]

23 hours ago, Bilo said:

It surely makes more sense to beef up defences in NATO allies that border Ukraine, namely Poland and Romania. 

We have a base in Norway with troops training for combat with Russia and in a doc Guy Martin said it’s all about controlling the shipping lanes, this was months before Trump was even in office I take it Greenland has something to do with this as well 

[Dunge]

13 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Wondered what the tactic on responding to this would be and Hesgeth has made his decision to go the gaslighting approach.  It never happened, plans, what plans?

So far - it never happened, fake news from a discredited reporter, it’s nothing to do with me despite me being president, it did happen but it only shows the cogs of a working government, and it’s the Democrats’ fault for scrimping on security.

[leicsmac]

15 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Wondered what the tactic on responding to this would be and Hesgeth has made his decision to go the gaslighting approach.  It never happened, plans, what plans?

 

1 minute ago, Dunge said:

So far - it never happened, fake news from a discredited reporter, it’s nothing to do with me despite me being president, it did happen but it only shows the cogs of a working government, and it’s the Democrats’ fault for scrimping on security.

Yep. Gaslight and disparage the reputation of the journo involved to make it look like no big thing.

 

The worst thing is the amount of people who will actually believe that is the case despite the evidence to the contrary.

[davieG]

20 hours ago, leicsmac said:

They would be well within their rights to refuse them permission to land.

They should let them land and then send them to Canada as illegal immigrants who could eject them and send them to Mexico who could eject them and send them to................. ad infintum

[Md9]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cg70xgxl3vmt

 

The White House confirms that a journalist was inadvertently added to a group chat where senior US officials discussed plans for a strike against the Houthi rebel group

 

Whoops.

 

"At one point in the thread the JD Vance account, the name of the vice-president, griped that the strikes would benefit the Europeans, because of their reliance on those shipping lanes, adding: "I just hate bailing Europe out again."

The user identified as Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary, responded three minutes later: "VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It's PATHETIC.""

 

As if there was any more proof needed of what this administration thinks of Europe and the UK.

Sure I have just seen He has said that it’s fake but the White House officials have said it isn’t .

every single person trump has employed is an idiot which is perfect for him.

every day is just more mental than the last at the minute 

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Md9 said:

Sure I have just seen He has said that it’s fake but the White House officials have said it isn’t .

every single person trump has employed is an idiot which is perfect for him.

every day is just more mental than the last at the minute 

I'm not sure that all of them are idiots, to be honest. At least some of them are power hungry and willing to go to serious lengths of malice to exercise that power, IMO.

[ealingfox]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm not sure that all of them are idiots, to be honest. At least some of them are power hungry and willing to go to serious lengths of malice to exercise that power, IMO.

 

Ok, but Hegseth is definitely an idiot.

[davieG]

[leicsmac]

Trump denying any knowledge of the group chat and what happened within it.

 

So... government officials are making unilateral discussions on military operations without the knowledge or consent of the commander-in-chief of those military forces, then?

 

That's a good look.

[Md9]

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Trump denying any knowledge of the group chat and what happened within it.

 

So... government officials are making unilateral discussions on military operations without the knowledge or consent of the commander-in-chief of those military forces, then?

 

That's a good look.

I am sure he knows he just doesn’t admit to anything being wrong ever and will pass the blame to someone lower down that will get fired to save him and his mate Pete from anything 

 

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Md9 said:

I am sure he knows he just doesn’t admit to anything being wrong ever and will pass the blame to someone lower down that will get fired to save him and his mate Pete from anything 

 

Perhaps.

 

It's either incompetent or deceptive whichever way it comes out, though.

[Sampson]

Latest UK voting intention. Be interesting to see what would happen if Greens and LibDems made a voting pact, they’d be leading the race.

 

Yougov voting intention

 

Labour 23% (-3)

Reform 22% (-2)

Tories 22%

Lib Dem 16% (+2)

Green 10% (+1)

Edited 25 March by Sampson

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Latest UK voting intention. Be interesting to see what would happen if Greens and LibDems made a voting pact, they’d be leading the race.

 

Yougov voting intention

 

Labour 23% (-3)

Reform 22% (-2)

Tories 22%

Lib Dem 16% (+2)

Green 10% (+1)

It would also be interesting to see how this translates to projected seats.

[Sampson]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

It would also be interesting to see how this translates to projected seats.

It’s hard to say but I suspect Labour, LibDems and Greens are much better at standing down in seats and forming a pact. I think Tories and Reform are at each other too much (despite being 2 sides of the same coin these days) and so will refuse to cooperate and ultimately take votes off each other. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

8 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Latest UK voting intention. Be interesting to see what would happen if Greens and LibDems made a voting pact, they’d be leading the race.

 

Yougov voting intention

 

Labour 23% (-3)

Reform 22% (-2)

Tories 22%

Lib Dem 16% (+2)

Green 10% (+1)

Surely the tightest ever spread across the top 5 parties? 

[Sampson]

22 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Surely the tightest ever spread across the top 5 parties? 

Almost certainly 

[Dunge]

3 hours ago, Sampson said:

Latest UK voting intention. Be interesting to see what would happen if Greens and LibDems made a voting pact, they’d be leading the race.

 

Yougov voting intention

 

Labour 23% (-3)

Reform 22% (-2)

Tories 22%

Lib Dem 16% (+2)

Green 10% (+1)

You’re kind of assuming their supporters would vote for the other there though.

For instance, at present I’d consider voting Lib Dem but wouldn’t vote Green.

[Sampson]

9 minutes ago, Dunge said:

You’re kind of assuming their supporters would vote for the other there though.

For instance, at present I’d consider voting Lib Dem but wouldn’t vote Green.

Yeah of course, they’re not really similar economically. Labour and LibDems are much closer than Greens and LibDems on most issues other than Europe. But I could totally see a world where both would stand down for each other to beat a Tory-Reform victory. 

Edited 25 March by Sampson