General News Thread

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Zear0 said:

Chamberlain gets such an unfair treatment. 

Fair to say. 

 

He got dealt an awful hand to play, but history also shows that he played it awfully as well. 

[Zear0]

31 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Fair to say. 

 

He got dealt an awful hand to play, but history also shows that he played it awfully as well. 

Why does it show he played it awfully?  If failure was not stopping Hitler start WW2, then nobody was going to stop that, he'd had it planned for a decade before September '39 

 

It's so easy to view it against what happened and point the finger at him but it's just no right.  He prioritised the Navy and Air Force anticipating what Hitler was going to do years in advance in his previous roles that was critical to surviving the early days of the war.  Flapping Peace in Our Time in the air wasn't a great look, but it was Britain (Nev) who declared war on Germany. 

 

Just like world powers now trying to carve up Ukraine, it could have been easy for Britain and France to stand back and let them do to Poland what they'd done to Czechoslovakia, but they didn't and actually committed to the defence treaty he signed with Poland (again something we didn't have the minerals to enforce nowadays through the Budapest memorandum).  Nobody in Britain wanted to go to war, so he's not going to go in d**k swinging making those threats to Hitler.  It's strange how trying to avert war is always badged as "appeasement" as if it's some dirty word.  I just don't get the revisionist hate on Chamberlain for failing to stop something that was utterly inevitable.

[leicsmac]

35 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Why does it show he played it awfully?  If failure was not stopping Hitler start WW2, then nobody was going to stop that, he'd had it planned for a decade before September '39 

 

It's so easy to view it against what happened and point the finger at him but it's just no right.  He prioritised the Navy and Air Force anticipating what Hitler was going to do years in advance in his previous roles that was critical to surviving the early days of the war.  Flapping Peace in Our Time in the air wasn't a great look, but it was Britain (Nev) who declared war on Germany. 

 

Just like world powers now trying to carve up Ukraine, it could have been easy for Britain and France to stand back and let them do to Poland what they'd done to Czechoslovakia, but they didn't and actually committed to the defence treaty he signed with Poland (again something we didn't have the minerals to enforce nowadays through the Budapest memorandum).  Nobody in Britain wanted to go to war, so he's not going to go in d**k swinging making those threats to Hitler.  It's strange how trying to avert war is always badged as "appeasement" as if it's some dirty word.  I just don't get the revisionist hate on Chamberlain for failing to stop something that was utterly inevitable.

That's a fair defence of the man tbh. A man perhaps stuck in a situation where all the choices were bad ones, then.

[foxes1988]

Part of the reason why Chamberlain pursued the appeasement strategy was to buy more time for our defences to rearm and build up.  We weren't ready for conflict.

[SkidsFox]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

That's a fair defence of the man tbh. A man perhaps stuck in a situation where all the choices were bad ones, then.

The best choice he made was to invest in the air force (and also the navy). With hindsight this seems like a no-brainer, but at the time people thought that France (and its Maginot line) would easily repulse any German attack, so there was unlikely to be any major attack on Britain.

[Sampson]

8 minutes ago, foxes1988 said:

Part of the reason why Chamberlain pursued the appeasement strategy was to buy more time for our defences to rearm and build up.  We weren't ready for conflict.

People say the same about Europe and Trump atm, but I’m just not confident we are actually rearming and building up behind the scenes and are instead just burying our head in the sand and convincing ourselves “the US will come back to the flock, it’s just a teenage phase they’re going through”

[CrazyKopCorner]

4 hours ago, Nalis said:

Worse than Boris and Truss?

Same ballpark or sea of sleaze as Boris. 

 

The man arrogantly thinks he's above it all 

 

I'd say worse as do the polls 

[StanSP]

4 hours ago, Nalis said:

Worse than Boris and Truss?

Truss was less than 50 days. Which makes the damage she did all the more spectacular! 

[worthosoriginals]

5 hours ago, danny. said:

It was the first link from a 5 second search. If you don’t think people are being jailed for social media posts in the U.K. I really can’t be bothered to spend more time than that. 

it wasn't agenda bias then?

[Foxdiamond]

1 hour ago, Zear0 said:

Why does it show he played it awfully?  If failure was not stopping Hitler start WW2, then nobody was going to stop that, he'd had it planned for a decade before September '39 

 

It's so easy to view it against what happened and point the finger at him but it's just no right.  He prioritised the Navy and Air Force anticipating what Hitler was going to do years in advance in his previous roles that was critical to surviving the early days of the war.  Flapping Peace in Our Time in the air wasn't a great look, but it was Britain (Nev) who declared war on Germany. 

 

Just like world powers now trying to carve up Ukraine, it could have been easy for Britain and France to stand back and let them do to Poland what they'd done to Czechoslovakia, but they didn't and actually committed to the defence treaty he signed with Poland (again something we didn't have the minerals to enforce nowadays through the Budapest memorandum).  Nobody in Britain wanted to go to war, so he's not going to go in d**k swinging making those threats to Hitler.  It's strange how trying to avert war is always badged as "appeasement" as if it's some dirty word.  I just don't get the revisionist hate on Chamberlain for failing to stop something that was utterly inevitable.

The benevolent view is that by delaying the war by 12 months it allowed the defence of our country to be improved which certainly appears to be true of the RAF. The Navy was another priority. The army was at the time seriously ill equipped. 

[Foxdiamond]

59 minutes ago, SkidsFox said:

The best choice he made was to invest in the air force (and also the navy). With hindsight this seems like a no-brainer, but at the time people thought that France (and its Maginot line) would easily repulse any German attack, so there was unlikely to be any major attack on Britain.

Yes unfortunately the Maginot line was based on outdated 1st World War ideas. The Germans simply bypassed it by attacking via the Ardennes which was thought impossible.  

[Foxdiamond]

54 minutes ago, Sampson said:

People say the same about Europe and Trump atm, but I’m just not confident we are actually rearming and building up behind the scenes and are instead just burying our head in the sand and convincing ourselves “the US will come back to the flock, it’s just a teenage phase they’re going through”

Unfortunately during the illusion of no threats to peace too many people advocate for cutting defence spending in favour of the things we like but forgetting the situation changes and beefing  up the kit takes a lot of time etc

[danny.]

25 minutes ago, worthosoriginals said:

it wasn't agenda bias then?

It was a pretty plain and easy to read statement. Let me spell it out for you though as it seems a few people on here haven't managed to comprehend what I actually said.

People in the UK get relatively long sentences for social media posts in my opinion.
People in the UK get relatively short sentences for abusing children in my opinion.

I don't like this.
I think it's terrible to abuse children.
I am a proponent of free speech, even if I find that speech abhorrent.
You might not agree, and that's fine. It's an opinion and this is a forum.

Hopefully that helps, but as a group please feel free to continue to add words to what I said, pretend I said something else, make little digs, laugh, throw personal insults about my intelligence, looks, pile-on etc. as a fully grown adult I really don't care. You're only making yourself look like children doing this. Enjoy!
 

Edited 13 February by danny.
spelling

[Voll Blau]

32 minutes ago, danny. said:

It was a pretty plain and easy to read statement. Let me spell it out for you though as it seems a few people on here haven't managed to comprehend what I actually said.

People in the UK get relatively long sentences for social media posts in my opinion.
People in the UK get relatively short sentences for abusing children in my opinion.

I don't like this.
I think it's terrible to abuse children.
I am a proponent of free speech, even if I find that speech abhorrent.
You might not agree, and that's fine. It's an opinion and this is a forum.

Hopefully that helps, but as a group please feel free to continue to add words to what I said, pretend I said something else, make little digs, laugh, throw personal insults about my intelligence, looks, pile-on etc. as a fully grown adult I really don't care. You're only making yourself look like children doing this. Enjoy!
 

Nobody gets sentenced for social media posts. We've been through this.

 

How long do you think someone should get for a Facebook post explicitly calling for people to abuse children?

[spezza74]

1 hour ago, Foxdiamond said:

Yes unfortunately the Maginot line was based on outdated 1st World War ideas. The Germans simply bypassed it by attacking via the Ardennes which was thought impossible.  

 

All the madder considering the Germans had basically done the same thing twice before. In living memory. 

[kenny]

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

People say the same about Europe and Trump atm, but I’m just not confident we are actually rearming and building up behind the scenes and are instead just burying our head in the sand and convincing ourselves “the US will come back to the flock, it’s just a teenage phase they’re going through”

You are probably right but Europe is currently arming Ukraine instead.

 

[foxes1988]

https://phys.org/news/2026-02-beavers-reintroduced-uk-year.html

 

Excellent news. More Beavers please

[Sampson]

He’s completely right about the Americanisation of European politics and his take on JD Vance’s comments and MAGA shouldn’t be our fight as Europeans. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4wpv0wx43o
 

World's rules-based order 'no longer exists', Germany's Merz warns

1 hour ago

Jaroslav Lukiv

 

The rules-based world order "no longer exists", the German Chancellor has warned at a major security summit.

 

Opening the annual Munich Security Conference, Friedrich Merz told other world leaders that "our freedom is not guaranteed" in an era of big power politics, and that Europeans must be ready to make "sacrifice".

 

He also admitted that "a deep divide has opened between Europe and the United States".

 

The conference is taking place on the backdrop of US President Donald Trump threatening Denmark's sovereignty over Greenland by pledging to annex the Arctic territory and his tariffs on imports from European nations.

 

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was listening to Merz and will deliver his own speech on Saturday, earlier spoke of a "new era in geopolitics".

 

Some 50 world leaders are expected to attend this year's conference, where European defence and the future of the transatlantic relationship will be discussed.

It comes at a time when US commitments to the Nato military alliance have been called into question. Trump's ambition to acquire Greenland has also been viewed by many European leaders as a watershed moment that has eroded trust with its biggest ally.

 

The Russia-Ukraine war, tensions between the West and China, as well as a potential Iran-US nuclear deal are also on the agenda at the annual gathering.

 

Referring to multiple warnings that the rules-based order was collapsing, Merz told the conference: "I fear we must put it even more bluntly: this order, however imperfect it was even at its best, no longer exists in that form."

 

He also said that "a rift, a deep divide has opened between Europe and the United States. Vice-President JD Vance said this very openly here in Munich a year ago".

 

Merz continued: "He was right. The culture war of the Maga [Make America Great Again] movement is not ours. Freedom of speech ends here with us when that speech goes against human dignity and the constitution. We do not believe in tariffs and protectionism, but in free trade."

 

Last year, Vance attacked Europe, including the UK, for policies on free speech and immigration. His speech triggered a year of unprecedented transatlantic tension.

But Merz did not write off the decades-long partnership, instead appealing directly to the US by saying "let's repair and revive transatlantic trust".

 

The German leader also revealed that "confidential talks" were ongoing with French President Emmanuel Macron on creating a joint European nuclear deterrent. He gave no further details.

 

France and the UK are the only two nuclear powers in Europe - but Germany and many other European nations have traditionally relied on the US nuclear umbrella within the Nato alliance for deterrence.

 

Ahead of the Munich conference, Rubio warned that "the world is changing very fast right in front of us" after being asked whether his message to Europeans would be more conciliatory than Vance's a year ago.

 

"We live in a new era in geopolitics, and it's going to require all of us to sort of re-examine what that looks like and what our role is going to be," he said.

 

Tensions have been heightened in recent months as Trump has repeatedly said that Greenland is vital to US national security, stating without evidence that it was "covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place".

 

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said on Friday that she planned to meet Rubio to discuss the US threats to seize Greenland from its Nato ally.

[Trav Le Bleu]

6 hours ago, SkidsFox said:

The best choice he made was to invest in the air force (and also the navy). With hindsight this seems like a no-brainer, but at the time people thought that France (and its Maginot line) would easily repulse any German attack, so there was unlikely to be any major attack on Britain.

The Maginot Line.

 

Build a massive line of huge static guns... and watch the enemy drive around them.

[Trav Le Bleu]

3 hours ago, foxes1988 said:

https://phys.org/news/2026-02-beavers-reintroduced-uk-year.html

 

Excellent news. More Beavers please

I think we can all agree, we don't see enough beavers on FoxesTalk.

[Zear0]

15 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

The Maginot Line.

 

Build a massive line of huge static guns... and watch the enemy drive around them.

The more you read about the French in that period the more depressing it is. They could have walked unhindered into Berlin if they wanted to after Hitler went East. Appreciate the scars of WW1 were deep for them, but they're ineptitude was just off the charts. 

 

P.S Sorry for derailing the topic. #StarmerOut

Edited 13 February by Zear0

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

He’s completely right about the Americanisation of European politics and his take on JD Vance’s comments and MAGA shouldn’t be our fight as Europeans. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4wpv0wx43o
 

World's rules-based order 'no longer exists', Germany's Merz warns

1 hour ago

Jaroslav Lukiv

 

The rules-based world order "no longer exists", the German Chancellor has warned at a major security summit.

 

Opening the annual Munich Security Conference, Friedrich Merz told other world leaders that "our freedom is not guaranteed" in an era of big power politics, and that Europeans must be ready to make "sacrifice".

 

He also admitted that "a deep divide has opened between Europe and the United States".

 

The conference is taking place on the backdrop of US President Donald Trump threatening Denmark's sovereignty over Greenland by pledging to annex the Arctic territory and his tariffs on imports from European nations.

 

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was listening to Merz and will deliver his own speech on Saturday, earlier spoke of a "new era in geopolitics".

 

Some 50 world leaders are expected to attend this year's conference, where European defence and the future of the transatlantic relationship will be discussed.

It comes at a time when US commitments to the Nato military alliance have been called into question. Trump's ambition to acquire Greenland has also been viewed by many European leaders as a watershed moment that has eroded trust with its biggest ally.

 

The Russia-Ukraine war, tensions between the West and China, as well as a potential Iran-US nuclear deal are also on the agenda at the annual gathering.

 

Referring to multiple warnings that the rules-based order was collapsing, Merz told the conference: "I fear we must put it even more bluntly: this order, however imperfect it was even at its best, no longer exists in that form."

 

He also said that "a rift, a deep divide has opened between Europe and the United States. Vice-President JD Vance said this very openly here in Munich a year ago".

 

Merz continued: "He was right. The culture war of the Maga [Make America Great Again] movement is not ours. Freedom of speech ends here with us when that speech goes against human dignity and the constitution. We do not believe in tariffs and protectionism, but in free trade."

 

Last year, Vance attacked Europe, including the UK, for policies on free speech and immigration. His speech triggered a year of unprecedented transatlantic tension.

But Merz did not write off the decades-long partnership, instead appealing directly to the US by saying "let's repair and revive transatlantic trust".

 

The German leader also revealed that "confidential talks" were ongoing with French President Emmanuel Macron on creating a joint European nuclear deterrent. He gave no further details.

 

France and the UK are the only two nuclear powers in Europe - but Germany and many other European nations have traditionally relied on the US nuclear umbrella within the Nato alliance for deterrence.

 

Ahead of the Munich conference, Rubio warned that "the world is changing very fast right in front of us" after being asked whether his message to Europeans would be more conciliatory than Vance's a year ago.

 

"We live in a new era in geopolitics, and it's going to require all of us to sort of re-examine what that looks like and what our role is going to be," he said.

 

Tensions have been heightened in recent months as Trump has repeatedly said that Greenland is vital to US national security, stating without evidence that it was "covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place".

 

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said on Friday that she planned to meet Rubio to discuss the US threats to seize Greenland from its Nato ally.

Leaders like Merz, Carney, Albanese and Frederiksen are exactly what is needed in many more places right now.

 

It is true; the current geopolitical game is changing. But leaders like that are necessary to highlight the unity that is needed worldwide now more than ever - even if the US and Russia appear to cling to the destructive old ideas of nationalism and do their best to drag as many other places along with them. 

[StanSP]

8 hours ago, danny. said:

I am a proponent of free speech, even if I find that speech abhorrent.

Me too. But freedom of speech doesn't mean there should be no consequences for it. 

 

Say what you want, doesn't mean you can get away with it. Freedom of speech shouldn't allow someone to be able to say what they want without consequences. It's not that you can't physically say you want to burn asylum seekers in hotels, it's that there will be consequences for saying it. 

[Clogger_]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

Me too. But freedom of speech doesn't mean there should be no consequences for it. 

 

Say what you want, doesn't mean you can get away with it. Freedom of speech shouldn't allow someone to be able to say what they want without consequences. It's not that you can't physically say you want to burn asylum seekers in hotels, it's that there will be consequences for saying it. 

Yep, no freedom from consequences. Also no freedom from decent people thinking you are a fascist scumbag, as those convicted most definitely were. Say it and own it

 

Taking a step away from FT for a second, isn't it strange that those most exercised by today's HC ruling are almost entirely the same folks who are most exercised by convictions "for posting on social media"? Almost as though their concerns have nothing to do with "free speech" at all 

[worthosoriginals]

7 hours ago, foxes1988 said:

https://phys.org/news/2026-02-beavers-reintroduced-uk-year.html

 

Excellent news. More Beavers please

Deffo, behave better than humans, like most animals and birds do,