General News Thread

[Alf Bentley]

2 hours ago, Lionator said:

Just to prove how strategically insane and stupid the main European politicians are these days, Merz, Macron and Starmer are now drafting an ‘alternative peace plan’ for Ukraine which is better for Ukraine? 
 

a) why would Russia stop fighting and accept that?

b) why weren’t they doing this anyway, rather than waiting for Trump? 
c) how did we end up with such useless foreign policy politicians? 

 

Merz, Macron and Starmer are NOT "drafting an 'alternative peace plan' for Ukraine". Having spoken to Zelensky, they are seeking to agree a joint position to try to persuade Trump to amend his plan. Here are Starmer's comments: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-remarks-on-ukraine-ahead-of-g20-summit-21-november-2025

Note: "We will discuss the current proposal on the table, and in support of President Trump’s push for peace, look at how we can strengthen this plan for the next phase of negotiations".

 

That attempt at persuasion may or may not work, but given what is at stake for Ukraine - and for Europe/the world in the medium-term - it is certainly worth trying. It is particularly worth trying given that Trump is an unpredictable leader who frequently shifts his stance on key issues - including having shifted to a more Ukraine-friendly, Putin-sceptic stance, at times, under the influence of allies.

 

a) Russia might or might not stop fighting and accept an amended plan. It might or might not stop fighting and accept Trump's plan....and Ukraine might or might not stop fighting and accept Trump's plan! Here's a supplementary question: In the medium-term, why would Russia not resume aggression towards Ukraine and other nations if its aggression is rewarded with large chunks of Ukraine, including areas it doesn't currently hold, a militarily weak Ukraine and major economic benefits - especially knowing that Trump is keen to minimise US military spending/NATO support?

Maybe appeasement of Putin would work - but the strategy of appeasement of military aggressors/dictators doesn't have a great track record.

 

b) Policy/strategy discussions between European nations have been ongoing. We know that from their previous contributions. But they have had to react to a new bilateral US-Russian plan from which they and Ukraine have largely been excluded. They have to react because the US is still the world's most powerful nation militarily and arguably economically and politically - and peace in Europe could be at stake.

 

c) As @Dahnsouff said, they're not useless, they're (comparatively, but not entirely) impotent. I suspect you hold a minority opinion in viewing Starmer, Macron and Merz as useless on foreign policy. The first two are deeply unpopular (DK re. Merz) but for reasons of economic performance / domestic policy / migration, not due to policy on Ukraine. I've not seen a recent poll but here is YouGov info dating to the time of the Trump-Putin Alaska summit: https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52766-where-do-britons-stand-on-ukraine-ahead-of-the-trump-putin-peace-meeting-in-alaska

[danny.]

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

I’m sorry but what does this even mean? Why is it like a liberal dictatorship? Why do we mostly follow them on geopolitical issues? I’m really unsure what your trying to get at here, it feels like weirdly coded language.
 

The overwhelming majority of British people fervently support Ukraine because they are uncontroversially the defenders in this war, and most of us think it’s frightening that one European country should just be allowed to invade another like that, iirc Europe has had a pretty long, scarring and bloody history with things like that. On the flip side it’s obvious Trump just doesn’t care at best, if not is much more on Russia’s side than Ukraine’s. It’s obvious though that Europe doesn’t have the military to defend itself and is too reliant on the US, I hope we ween ourself off US support and UK, France, Germany, Poland and the rest of Western and Central Europe create a military alliance which can hold up against US, China and Russia, and I’d love for the UK to break off from its over reliance on the US, but it’s not going to happen overnight, so this peace treaty thing is obviously just optics. It probably won’t achieve much but I think it’s good to see us looking different from the US in this world, I just hope we take military build up seriously.

 

im with you on your point B though, was the same with the pandemic and it feels very much the same with AI - why are we not planning this? Why are we not planning and letting the public know for the potentially economic and civilization ending issues of AI? Even if it’s a 0.1% chance we should plan for it and be sending “in case of emergency” pamphlets explaining the dangers through every door.

We don’t do planning in the U.K., haven’t for decades, it’s why our infrastructure is so behind. I.e. when Europe was building light rail networks we build motorways, and now we don’t even do that. Good at spaffing billions on HS2 though. 

[Parafox]

9 hours ago, Lionator said:

Just to prove how strategically insane and stupid the main European politicians are these days, Merz, Macron and Starmer are now drafting an ‘alternative peace plan’ for Ukraine which is better for Ukraine? 
 

a) why would Russia stop fighting and accept that?

b) why weren’t they doing this anyway, rather than waiting for Trump? 
c) how did we end up with such useless foreign policy politicians? 

 

Just the foreign policy ones?

[leicsmac]

10 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

They don't win longer term I agree, but it is frustrating that such people are protected by The Prisoners Dilemma made policy.

It is deeply frustrating because it leads to no good end for anyone, and it's so preventable.

 

10 hours ago, BKLFox said:

I particularly look at points 12 & 14 whereby the US led rebuilding & investing of UKE will be funded by seized Russian assets & the European £/€…however 50% of investment profits & an unmentioned % of extracted minerals and natural resources will go to the US..there will be few feet on the ground from the US but very many hands in there.

 

& yes @leicsmac I get this will only be enjoyed for a short time as the end is nigh.

Nothing to disagree with there. It's a perfect illustration of how destructive self-interest, both personal and national, can be.

[Jon the Hat]

Someone has convinced Candace Owen’s the Macrons have hired assassins to kill her.  

[Heathrow fox]

15 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Merz, Macron and Starmer are NOT "drafting an 'alternative peace plan' for Ukraine". Having spoken to Zelensky, they are seeking to agree a joint position to try to persuade Trump to amend his plan. Here are Starmer's comments: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-remarks-on-ukraine-ahead-of-g20-summit-21-november-2025

Note: "We will discuss the current proposal on the table, and in support of President Trump’s push for peace, look at how we can strengthen this plan for the next phase of negotiations".

 

That attempt at persuasion may or may not work, but given what is at stake for Ukraine - and for Europe/the world in the medium-term - it is certainly worth trying. It is particularly worth trying given that Trump is an unpredictable leader who frequently shifts his stance on key issues - including having shifted to a more Ukraine-friendly, Putin-sceptic stance, at times, under the influence of allies.

 

a) Russia might or might not stop fighting and accept an amended plan. It might or might not stop fighting and accept Trump's plan....and Ukraine might or might not stop fighting and accept Trump's plan! Here's a supplementary question: In the medium-term, why would Russia not resume aggression towards Ukraine and other nations if its aggression is rewarded with large chunks of Ukraine, including areas it doesn't currently hold, a militarily weak Ukraine and major economic benefits - especially knowing that Trump is keen to minimise US military spending/NATO support?

Maybe appeasement of Putin would work - but the strategy of appeasement of military aggressors/dictators doesn't have a great track record.

 

b) Policy/strategy discussions between European nations have been ongoing. We know that from their previous contributions. But they have had to react to a new bilateral US-Russian plan from which they and Ukraine have largely been excluded. They have to react because the US is still the world's most powerful nation militarily and arguably economically and politically - and peace in Europe could be at stake.

 

c) As @Dahnsouff said, they're not useless, they're (comparatively, but not entirely) impotent. I suspect you hold a minority opinion in viewing Starmer, Macron and Merz as useless on foreign policy. The first two are deeply unpopular (DK re. Merz) but for reasons of economic performance / domestic policy / migration, not due to policy on Ukraine. I've not seen a recent poll but here is YouGov info dating to the time of the Trump-Putin Alaska summit: https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52766-where-do-britons-stand-on-ukraine-ahead-of-the-trump-putin-peace-meeting-in-alaska

You can produce polls all you want.Deep down few really care anymore.October the 7th did it for Ukraine.It changed the direction.Took much of the attention away and made so many people look utterly foolish.

If there’s anything that makes Labour and Conservative look like two cheeks of the same backside, it’s foreign policy.A foreign policy that has led to so many of our current issues.Including the handling of Ukraine and also Russia since the fall of the USSR.

 

[Md9]

About the 3rd time this week they have been community noted for lying 😂 at this point anything they say you just have to assume the opposite 

[Zear0]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Someone has convinced Candace Owen’s the Macrons have hired assassins to kill her.  

She just needs ignoring. Thick as pig s**te. 

[Zear0]

US senator King saying Rubio briefed them the Ukraine "peace plan" was exclusively Russian demands that the cretin Witkoff just accepted and the administration didn't support it. 

 

Obviously arse covering going on denying this but I know who I believe. Trump administration is so inept it's beyond parody. 

[Md9]

27 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

US senator King saying Rubio briefed them the Ukraine "peace plan" was exclusively Russian demands that the cretin Witkoff just accepted and the administration didn't support it. 

 

Obviously arse covering going on denying this but I know who I believe. Trump administration is so inept it's beyond parody. 

The whole administration is corrupt beyond anything you will probably see again in your life.  Once trump is gone one way or another these clowns that are lying for him on a daily basis will be in so much s*** even the amazing Donald trump wont be able to save them 

[leicsmac]

43 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

US senator King saying Rubio briefed them the Ukraine "peace plan" was exclusively Russian demands that the cretin Witkoff just accepted and the administration didn't support it. 

 

Obviously arse covering going on denying this but I know who I believe. Trump administration is so inept it's beyond parody. 

I don't actually think that it's ineptitude in the case of some of them.

 

I think that some of them really, truly believe in the idea of nationalist and demographic superiority that they really believe Russia is doing nothing wrong, is simply doing what the "strong" do to the "weak', and should be permitted to do it because that's the way the "world works". As such, they're making decisions to that effect. 

 

It's not incompetence, it's malice. 

 

 

[UniFox21]

This is good news and some actual common sense politics. However, commuting is still ridiculously priced and not increasing prices doesn't make this any more accessible to people.

[BKLFox]

1 hour ago, UniFox21 said:

This is good news and some actual common sense politics. However, commuting is still ridiculously priced and not increasing prices doesn't make this any more accessible to people.

Yes reading that this morning though and how they (Gov) are speaking as if they are putting money (£300) back in our pockets but actually the truth is they are just not taking another (£300) from us, I’m sure they think we are bloody idiots.

[Trav Le Bleu]

6 hours ago, Md9 said:

About the 3rd time this week they have been community noted for lying 😂 at this point anything they say you just have to assume the opposite 

I agree wholeheartedly with "stopping... foreign relations seems to be a strong suit."

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crk7mk5k3yjo

 

Lawmakers and judiciary in North Dakota decide that a woman is legally obliged to carry her rapists baby to term if she doesn't know she's pregnant within six weeks of it happening.

 

Next up for those advocating for this: the same thing to be implemented nationwide, along with guaranteed visitation rights for the rapist, presumably.

[Claridge]

7 hours ago, BKLFox said:

Yes reading that this morning though and how they (Gov) are speaking as if they are putting money (£300) back in our pockets but actually the truth is they are just not taking another (£300) from us, I’m sure they think we are bloody idiots.

Spent 18 months doing it, presume they do.

[leicsmac]

8 hours ago, BKLFox said:

Yes reading that this morning though and how they (Gov) are speaking as if they are putting money (£300) back in our pockets but actually the truth is they are just not taking another (£300) from us, I’m sure they think we are bloody idiots.

If the government think we're bloody idiots on this one, the private railway companies must think we're utterly gargantuan idiots, given what they've been able to cream from the public over the last few decades. 

[Tommy G]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

If the government think we're bloody idiots on this one, the private railway companies must think we're utterly gargantuan idiots, given what they've been able to cream from the public over the last few decades. 

But but but what about the poor train drivers? 

[Lionator]

10 hours ago, leicsmac said:

I don't actually think that it's ineptitude in the case of some of them.

 

I think that some of them really, truly believe in the idea of nationalist and demographic superiority that they really believe Russia is doing nothing wrong, is simply doing what the "strong" do to the "weak', and should be permitted to do it because that's the way the "world works". As such, they're making decisions to that effect. 

 

It's not incompetence, it's malice. 

 

 

Some would call it malice, others would call it realism. 
 

What’s alternative, keep pushing Ukraine to fight a war that they risk losing (the way things are going they will), declare nuclear ww3 by fighting Russia or trying to muster a plan to end this crap in a way which meets the needs of Ukraine and Russia as much as possible? 

[Zear0]

10 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Some would call it malice, others would call it realism. 
 

What’s alternative, keep pushing Ukraine to fight a war that they risk losing (the way things are going they will), declare nuclear ww3 by fighting Russia or trying to muster a plan to end this crap in a way which meets the needs of Ukraine and Russia as much as possible? 

Keep fighting a war they might (probably) lose, or sign up to that deal and guarantee to lose. Giving up their entire fortress belt, restricting armed forces size, no more weapons and western planes ejected from the country. I'd give Putin a week before he has another run after Ukraine signed the deal as is. It's worse than getting US support dropped. 

 

Not saying there's an easy solution, but it's insane what they've proposed and not surprising it was translated directly in Russian. They don't need Western support to an extend to win it all back, they just need to be able to be able to take something back so Putin will take what he's got. As long as Russia are advancing, which they are, they don't want a deal either. Need to stop defaulting to Petrov speak that any support can be met with nuclear responses. 

[leicsmac]

38 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

But but but what about the poor train drivers? 

... is there a reason they're particularly vulnerable in this situation?

 

38 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Some would call it malice, others would call it realism. 
 

What’s alternative, keep pushing Ukraine to fight a war that they risk losing (the way things are going they will), declare nuclear ww3 by fighting Russia or trying to muster a plan to end this crap in a way which meets the needs of Ukraine and Russia as much as possible? 

The very idea that such malice is even seen as "realism" is a big reason why it keeps going on, with all the associated consequences. 

 

And, quite aside from that, Might Makes Right will only end awfully for everyone. That is an inevitability.

[Lionator]

20 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

... is there a reason they're particularly vulnerable in this situation?

 

The very idea that such malice is even seen as "realism" is a big reason why it keeps going on, with all the associated consequences. 

 

And, quite aside from that, Might Makes Right will only end awfully for everyone. That is an inevitability.

We are sadly heading back into an era of might makes right, international institutions are crumbling and climate crises only lead to resource grabs.

 

47 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Keep fighting a war they might (probably) lose, or sign up to that deal and guarantee to lose. Giving up their entire fortress belt, restricting armed forces size, no more weapons and western planes ejected from the country. I'd give Putin a week before he has another run after Ukraine signed the deal as is. It's worse than getting US support dropped. 

 

Not saying there's an easy solution, but it's insane what they've proposed and not surprising it was translated directly in Russian. They don't need Western support to an extend to win it all back, they just need to be able to be able to take something back so Putin will take what he's got. As long as Russia are advancing, which they are, they don't want a deal either. Need to stop defaulting to Petrov speak that any support can be met with nuclear responses. 

the deal that Ukraine is being offered now is likely much better than one they’d get if they fight another 12-24 months. They’d be a sovereign nation, on Feb 24, 2022 everyone would’ve taken where we are now. So take it.

 

The Russian translation thing is a stupid red herring that the biggest idiots with no plan keep clinging onto as some sort of ludicrous ‘gotcha’. Of course it’s going to be translated because it involves a Russian speaking country. 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Lionator said:

We are sadly heading back into an era of might makes right, international institutions are crumbling and climate crises only lead to resource grabs.

 

If we're accepting that as inevitable (and that's entirely possible), then we're likewise probably accepting the downfall of global civilisation into a few isolated enclaves, probably within the lifetimes of most contributors here, as inevitable. 

 

Might Makes Right nationalism will not survive the challenges that lie ahead. That is obvious. 

 

So, with that in mind, I guess it's up to everyone to choose their path. 

Edited 23 November 2025 by leicsmac

[Zear0]

24 minutes ago, Lionator said:

We are sadly heading back into an era of might makes right, international institutions are crumbling and climate crises only lead to resource grabs.

 

the deal that Ukraine is being offered now is likely much better than one they’d get if they fight another 12-24 months. They’d be a sovereign nation, on Feb 24, 2022 everyone would’ve taken where we are now. So take it.

 

The Russian translation thing is a stupid red herring that the biggest idiots with no plan keep clinging onto as some sort of ludicrous ‘gotcha’. Of course it’s going to be translated because it involves a Russian speaking country. 

They won't be a sovereign nation if they agree to this for reasons I've said. It's a death sentence for them and just moves Europe closer to being the next targets.

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

But but but what about the poor train drivers?