General News Thread

[Salisbury Fox]

29 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's a difficult conundrum because such things always have to follow the geopolitical landscape which is constantly shifting.

 

But it terms of actually defending the existence of the UK as a state, as an island nation existing nuclear weaponry for deterrent, naval options for addressing threats to "lifelines" and a modest ground contingent for overseas territories should be all that's needed in terms of overall manpower. Looking into digital options and UAV's appears to be important now, looking from the way the current conflicts are playing out.

 

 

And I think it's also over-simplifying to say that at least some of those things are the UK's responsibility without explaining why beyond some sentiment based on "it's what we've always done and what we should do".

Many of those responsibilities exist because they directly affect our security and prosperity. I think it’s fair to question how much we spend on defence and look for ways where we can reduce commitments perhaps through a greater reliance on allies, but that’s a different argument to these threats don’t matter or aren’t our responsibility. 

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

Many of those responsibilities exist because they directly affect our security and prosperity. I think it’s fair to question how much we spend on defence and look for ways where we can reduce commitments perhaps through a greater reliance on allies, but that’s a different argument to these threats don’t matter or aren’t our responsibility. 

Of course, I was looking for a bit more meat on the bone (as it were) because it seems that so often arguments about "defending the realm" veer into sentimental arguments rather than logical ones. 

[DJW1]

In relation to the war in Ukraine, I have a couple of queries that may be nonsense, or may be obvious.

 

1. Bearing in mind the Russian´s stockpile of missiles, including nuclear  warheads, why have they not obliterated Kiev in one night? Apart from the use of drones, in some aspects this war is like WWII (or even WWI), with the front line shifting relatively little from one week to another.

 

2. Could it be that, although the NATO countries and others have called for the war to end many times, in fact they are quite content to keep fighting a proxy war against Russia, in Ukraine? This prevents the Russians from moving their sights further north and also means that any casualties and loss of infrastructure are limited to Ukraine.

[Md9]

Tommy Robinson arrested again and begging for donations for his legal fees . Tw@

[Bellend Sebastian]

6 minutes ago, Md9 said:

Tommy Robinson arrested again and begging for donations for his legal fees . Tw@

On his way back from Russia where he met Elon Musk's Dad. You couldn't make it up etc

 

A veritable Lord Haw Haw for our times

Edited 14 hours ago by Bellend Sebastian

[Md9]

6 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

On his way back from Russia where he met Elon Musk's Dad. You couldn't make it up etc

 

A veritable Lord Haw Haw for our times

Spends a lot of time moaning about England and only pops back over for the odd riot then goes off to wherever he hides out while he winds everyone up again gets arrested and then begs for everyone to help pay it ? Rinse and repeat every few months and somehow everyone donates to the clown 

[Salisbury Fox]

12 minutes ago, DJW1 said:

In relation to the war in Ukraine, I have a couple of queries that may be nonsense, or may be obvious.

 

1. Bearing in mind the Russian´s stockpile of missiles, including nuclear  warheads, why have they not obliterated Kiev in one night? Apart from the use of drones, in some aspects this war is like WWII (or even WWI), with the front line shifting relatively little from one week to another.

 

2. Could it be that, although the NATO countries and others have called for the war to end many times, in fact they are quite content to keep fighting a proxy war against Russia, in Ukraine? This prevents the Russians from moving their sights further north and also means that any casualties and loss of infrastructure are limited to Ukraine.

1. Russia’s intent is to force Ukraine into its sphere of influence rather than destroying it. Dropping nukes  would make them even more of a Pariah around the world and jeopardise the relationships with countries that have remained neutral or continued trading with them. 
 

2. NATO clearly benefits from reducing Russia's war machine, but I’m sure that many countries in the alliance would rather spend their money elsewhere like we see playing out in the UK currently. 

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

1. Russia’s intent is to force Ukraine into its sphere of influence rather than destroying it. Dropping nukes  would make them even more of a Pariah around the world and jeopardise the relationships with countries that have remained neutral or continued trading with them. 
 

2. NATO clearly benefits from reducing Russia's war machine, but I’m sure that many countries in the alliance would rather spend their money elsewhere like we see playing out in the UK currently. 

And to add to this, the Russians, while nasty, aren't insane and have their own protocol regarding nuclear weapons release, viz. only when attacked with nuclear weapons themselves, or when under conventional attack and the survival of the state is threatened. 

 

They could be lying about those conditions, but right now the situation satisfies neither of them, thankfully. 

[st albans fox]

14 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

And to add to this, the Russians, while nasty, aren't insane and have their own protocol regarding nuclear weapons release, viz. only when attacked with nuclear weapons themselves, or when under conventional attack and the survival of the state is threatened. 

 

They could be lying about those conditions, but right now the situation satisfies neither of them, thankfully. 

the theory of MAD works for all countries that currently have nuclear weapons. 
are there countries around the world for whom that wouldn’t work ?

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

the theory of MAD works for all countries that currently have nuclear weapons. 
are there countries around the world for whom that wouldn’t work ?

Good question. 

 

I think some folks might have such a dim and tribal and dehumanising view of other human demographics that they disagree with this, but I think probably not - no human group is, imo, actually willing to die and let its entire group also die for the sake of an ideology, no matter what words they might utter about it. 

 

Of course, there are quite a few groups who would be quite willing (and able) to make sure everyone else dies, so long as their group survives. But that's a different matter, and (thankfully) for the moment, not possible with the principle of MAD standing. 

[DJW1]

1 hour ago, Md9 said:

Spends a lot of time moaning about England and only pops back over for the odd riot then goes off to wherever he hides out while he winds everyone up again gets arrested and then begs for everyone to help pay it ? Rinse and repeat every few months and somehow everyone donates to the clown 

He´s a veritable John Bull, except that he is the son of an Irish immigrant and holds an Irish passport

[Alf Bentley]

Some interesting charts and analysis in this article about the economic and other impacts of Brexit for the UK (not a long or over-complex article):

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/14/how-uk-economy-changed-since-brexit-vote-charts

 

For those without the time or inclination to read it, main points.....

- Claims that Brexit would cause an immediate recession & unemployment were wrong

- Almost every other prediction of long-term economic damage has proven correct: value of Sterling; growth compared to similar nations; trade in goods; investment & employment all significantly damaged

- Trade in services is an exception: UK trade in services has slightly outperformed other G7 nations since Brexit - whereas UK trade in goods has performed much worse. The OBS reckons this is because Boris' Brexit deal created a lot of friction for goods but little for services, so the City of London & big finance has done well, whereas industry, SME manufacturers & farmers have been damaged

- Net migration shows more EU citizens leaving than arriving in the past 4 years, but there was a massive surge in non-EU immigration post-Brexit (almost 1m in 2022-23). This happened under Brexit general Boris (& the brief lettuce regime), started to fall in Sunak's last year and has fallen by about 80% since then

- Since 2021 (end of transition period), an ever greater percentage of people believe Brexit was a mistake: currently about 58%-31%

 

For those who might suspect The Guardian of bias, the sources for the report seem highly credible: ONS, OECD, G7 & OBS, as well as the authors own statistical modelling.

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

Some interesting charts and analysis in this article about the economic and other impacts of Brexit for the UK (not a long or over-complex article):

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/14/how-uk-economy-changed-since-brexit-vote-charts

 

For those without the time or inclination to read it, main points.....

- Claims that Brexit would cause an immediate recession & unemployment were wrong

- Almost every other prediction of long-term economic damage has proven correct: value of Sterling; growth compared to similar nations; trade in goods; investment & employment all significantly damaged

- Trade in services is an exception: UK trade in services has slightly outperformed other G7 nations since Brexit - whereas UK trade in goods has performed much worse. The OBS reckons this is because Boris' Brexit deal created a lot of friction for goods but little for services, so the City of London & big finance has done well, whereas industry, SME manufacturers & farmers have been damaged

- Net migration shows more EU citizens leaving than arriving in the past 4 years, but there was a massive surge in non-EU immigration post-Brexit (almost 1m in 2022-23). This happened under Brexit general Boris (& the brief lettuce regime), started to fall in Sunak's last year and has fallen by about 80% since then

- Since 2021 (end of transition period), an ever greater percentage of people believe Brexit was a mistake: currently about 58%-31%

 

For those who might suspect The Guardian of bias, the sources for the report seem highly credible: ONS, OECD, G7 & OBS, as well as the authors own statistical modelling.

All fairly predictable 

fwiw, I always thought brexit would have to be judged over a couple of decades rather than the five to ten years following the negotiated exit deal finally beginning.
 

hence anyone who asked me if it was a good idea to vote leave was told ‘no idea’ in the longer term over 20/30 years  but definitely markedly negative for the initial decade.
 . 
 

[Alf Bentley]

34 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

All fairly predictable 

fwiw, I always thought brexit would have to be judged over a couple of decades rather than the five to ten years following the negotiated exit deal finally beginning.
 

hence anyone who asked me if it was a good idea to vote leave was told ‘no idea’ in the longer term over 20/30 years  but definitely markedly negative for the initial decade.
 . 
 

 

I quite agree that economic stats need to be judged in the longer-term. Politicians (of any party) proclaiming their success or their opponents' failure, based on stats for the latest quarter, are almost certainly making worthless claims for electoral advantage.

 

Mind you, leave it too long and it becomes increasingly difficult to disentangle the economic impacts of a particular event from all the other intervening events/actions.

 

My Dad used to come out with a quote from the 1970s by Chinese politician Zhou En-Lai (?). Apparently, he was asked about the impact of the French Revolution and replied that it was "too early to tell". 

[st albans fox]

Interesting day in the middle east

 

trump says a memorandum of understanding is to be signed off today with Iran.

iran say not today but no reason why it wouldn’t be tomorrow or Tuesday 

this is the first time that Iran has been on this narrative so positive developments.

 

Israel could derail any ‘deal’ via their actions in Lebanon.  Iran have said striking s Beirut is a red line. Israel have said that if hezbollah launch rockets into n Israel then they will respond by hitting s Beirut.  This morning, Hezbollah did exactly this.  Presumably this was Iran seeing if trump could hold Netanyahu from responding.  Israel have struck an apartment in s Beirut as they promised they would. 
 

now we wait to see what Iran does. will we go through another sequence of Iranian missiles fired at Israel (not in a very threatening way in that won’t be enough to overwhelm defences) and Israeli jets then bombing Iranian radar installations.   Trump then calls everyone off!

 

What then happens with the agreement ????

 

[Zear0]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

Some interesting charts and analysis in this article about the economic and other impacts of Brexit for the UK (not a long or over-complex article):

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/14/how-uk-economy-changed-since-brexit-vote-charts

 

For those without the time or inclination to read it, main points.....

- Claims that Brexit would cause an immediate recession & unemployment were wrong

- Almost every other prediction of long-term economic damage has proven correct: value of Sterling; growth compared to similar nations; trade in goods; investment & employment all significantly damaged

- Trade in services is an exception: UK trade in services has slightly outperformed other G7 nations since Brexit - whereas UK trade in goods has performed much worse. The OBS reckons this is because Boris' Brexit deal created a lot of friction for goods but little for services, so the City of London & big finance has done well, whereas industry, SME manufacturers & farmers have been damaged

- Net migration shows more EU citizens leaving than arriving in the past 4 years, but there was a massive surge in non-EU immigration post-Brexit (almost 1m in 2022-23). This happened under Brexit general Boris (& the brief lettuce regime), started to fall in Sunak's last year and has fallen by about 80% since then

- Since 2021 (end of transition period), an ever greater percentage of people believe Brexit was a mistake: currently about 58%-31%

 

For those who might suspect The Guardian of bias, the sources for the report seem highly credible: ONS, OECD, G7 & OBS, as well as the authors own statistical modelling.

Can’t put a number on taking back control mate.

[Md9]

52 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Interesting day in the middle east

 

trump says a memorandum of understanding is to be signed off today with Iran.

iran say not today but no reason why it wouldn’t be tomorrow or Tuesday 

this is the first time that Iran has been on this narrative so positive developments.

 

Israel could derail any ‘deal’ via their actions in Lebanon.  Iran have said striking s Beirut is a red line. Israel have said that if hezbollah launch rockets into n Israel then they will respond by hitting s Beirut.  This morning, Hezbollah did exactly this.  Presumably this was Iran seeing if trump could hold Netanyahu from responding.  Israel have struck an apartment in s Beirut as they promised they would. 
 

now we wait to see what Iran does. will we go through another sequence of Iranian missiles fired at Israel (not in a very threatening way in that won’t be enough to overwhelm defences) and Israeli jets then bombing Iranian radar installations.   Trump then calls everyone off!

 

What then happens with the agreement ????

 

Trump has said it’s close to being agreed ever week since it started and are no closer to it. Fat orange fool just wants to say it’s done on his birthday because everything is about him. I don’t think he cares if it stops or not no one is doing anything about it to stop him 

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, Md9 said:

Trump has said it’s close to being agreed ever week since it started and are no closer to it. Fat orange fool just wants to say it’s done on his birthday because everything is about him. I don’t think he cares if it stops or not no one is doing anything about it to stop him 

Yes he has but this time Iran and Pakistan agreed that the text of the MOU was done. 
That’s the difference 

 

trump’s apparent desperation to make a deal reveals that Iran has effectively won by not being defeated and needed to surrender. They may well end up in a much better position than they were pre war. 

Edited 10 hours ago by st albans fox

[Md9]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Yes he has but this time Iran and Pakistan agreed that the text of the MOU was done. 
That’s the difference 

 

trump’s apparent desperation to make a deal reveals that Iran has effectively won by not being defeated and needed to surrender. They may well end up in a much better position than they were pre war. 

It will probably have the same agreement Obama had in place already just caused a lot of chaos for no reason what so ever but will spin it as a win for him somehow even though it was a ridiculous thing to do in the first place 

 

[Alf Bentley]

57 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Can’t put a number on taking back control mate.

 

I wonder who's taken back control and what of?

 

My guess is that you mean big capital has taken back control of the economy, politics and society to the same extent as in the Victorian era.

Either that or you're referring to the Labour Govt taking back control of immigration? 

 

Oh well, wrong time to debate as Germany v. Curaçao is almost upon us....

[Robo61]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I wonder who's taken back control and what of?

 

My guess is that you mean big capital has taken back control of the economy, politics and society to the same extent as in the Victorian era.

Either that or you're referring to the Labour Govt taking back control of immigration? 

 

Oh well, wrong time to debate as Germany v. Curaçao is almost upon us....

My question to the average Brexiteer,do they persinally feel more in control of anything and if so what.

[bovril]

5 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

Some interesting charts and analysis in this article about the economic and other impacts of Brexit for the UK (not a long or over-complex article):

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/14/how-uk-economy-changed-since-brexit-vote-charts

 

For those without the time or inclination to read it, main points.....

- Claims that Brexit would cause an immediate recession & unemployment were wrong

- Almost every other prediction of long-term economic damage has proven correct: value of Sterling; growth compared to similar nations; trade in goods; investment & employment all significantly damaged

- Trade in services is an exception: UK trade in services has slightly outperformed other G7 nations since Brexit - whereas UK trade in goods has performed much worse. The OBS reckons this is because Boris' Brexit deal created a lot of friction for goods but little for services, so the City of London & big finance has done well, whereas industry, SME manufacturers & farmers have been damaged

- Net migration shows more EU citizens leaving than arriving in the past 4 years, but there was a massive surge in non-EU immigration post-Brexit (almost 1m in 2022-23). This happened under Brexit general Boris (& the brief lettuce regime), started to fall in Sunak's last year and has fallen by about 80% since then

- Since 2021 (end of transition period), an ever greater percentage of people believe Brexit was a mistake: currently about 58%-31%

 

For those who might suspect The Guardian of bias, the sources for the report seem highly credible: ONS, OECD, G7 & OBS, as well as the authors own statistical modelling.

I know in England we all have to pretend this isn't the case but giving up freedom of movement is as bad as any of those things in my opinion 

[Md9]

[Alf Bentley]

26 minutes ago, bovril said:

I know in England we all have to pretend this isn't the case but giving up freedom of movement is as bad as any of those things in my opinion 

 

Fair comment, though I plead guilty to any charge of pretence. My post was just addressing the charts in the article, not seeking to look at Brexit pros (?) and cons generally.

 

I also probably think less about freedom of movement as, through my Irish Dad, I was able to get Irish passports for myself and my daughter, so as to keep freedom of movement. Though I've not used my Irish passport yet - still used the British one, so far.

 

Come to think of it, there's a massive irony there: British people whose families have immigrated from other EU nations still keep freedom of movement, while "purer" Brits descended from the Normans and Anglo-Saxons don't. Though, to be fair, us Celts were here before them, anyway - our ancestors were mainly pushed across the Irish Sea by the Romans, I think? 

 

Perhaps the only fair solution to all the national identity/immigration issues is for all of humanity to return to its roots - and go back to living up trees in the Congo, from where I believe we first descended and started walking, thereby arguably becoming the human race. 

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Fair comment, though I plead guilty to any charge of pretence. My post was just addressing the charts in the article, not seeking to look at Brexit pros (?) and cons generally.

 

I also probably think less about freedom of movement as, through my Irish Dad, I was able to get Irish passports for myself and my daughter, so as to keep freedom of movement. Though I've not used my Irish passport yet - still used the British one, so far.

 

Come to think of it, there's a massive irony there: British people whose families have immigrated from other EU nations still keep freedom of movement, while "purer" Brits descended from the Normans and Anglo-Saxons don't. Though, to be fair, us Celts were here before them, anyway - our ancestors were mainly pushed across the Irish Sea by the Romans, I think? 

 

Perhaps the only fair solution to all the national identity/immigration issues is for all of humanity to return to its roots - and go back to living up trees in the Congo, from where I believe we first descended and started walking, thereby arguably becoming the human race. 

Unfortunately, there are far too many nationalists (and others, come to that) who can't agree on that being the fact that it is. 

 

It's like our species wants to invent reasons to pick problems because for some reason we think the natural world isn't giving us enough.