• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

monkeybarry said:
I'm no nationist, nor a natural labour voter - but I feel proud to be British today.

Great work Mr Starmer.
With one act (and no small act - excellent leadership and politics) you've
Helped to protect Ukraine,
Set a sensible and reasonable platform for peace talks
Stuck two fingers up to Trumps bullying and shown him the way forward morally (his response will be very very interesting)
The loan and UKEF parts of the deal also give the UK the preferable position in getting paid back and future relations with Ukraine.

We've been a political basketcase since Cameron

Today feels like a change
Click to expand...

I had exactly the same sentiment. Crap leadership since Blair capitulated to GWB. Very much applaud the effects of the British government and the European leaders. With von der Leyen explicitly protecting the pre 2014 borders they also have some negotiating room.

If Trump wants to sign anything he can fudging well sign it in Europe and he can leave his lapdogs at the pound.
 
Gutter Boy said:
Its less than double what its currently paying, so its not actually that much. And i doubt Russia has another year left in it, so not for very long either. There's also the option of using the frozen Russian assets, as was hinted at today, which makes its very painless.
Click to expand...
It wasn't even hinted at. It was clearly stated that is what is happening (unless I misheard) and will continue to do so.

I do wonder if Putin miscalculated there and didn't expect European nations to freeze those assets and eventually take them - technically its theft, surely?! Credit to Johnson's Govt for being decisive with that. I suspect Putin was expecting to be able to use that money.
 
markysimmo said:
Be nice if it ended rather than rumbling on, let's be honest neither side is winning it are they
Click to expand...
Russia is slowly winning. They've almost surrounded pokrovsk and that is a major intersection of rail and road for the Donetsk region. The Ukrainians have been using it as a logistics hub to keep the eastern front supplied. If it falls it will likely result in Russia rapidly capturing what is left of Donetsk oblast under Ukrainian control as the next defendable position. Ukraine are likely to retreat to If Polrovsk falls is outside the Donetsk borders. That will put Russia within touching distance of securing their first strategic military objective: capturing the entirety of the Donbas. While Ukraine have been slowly retreating, trying to inflict maximum pain on attackers before falling back to the next defendable village, if US aid drops off it is likely to become a rout which it almost did the last time US aid was delayed in being approved in Congress.
 
johnola said:
Well they are illegal Mark, all the illegal stuff anybody does has cost implications to our society.

And besides it has naff all to do with European/British security.
Click to expand...
All the unchecked young men of fighting age coming in defo doesn't help the security of Britain, defo not the women
 
johnola said:
Not going to bankrupt us Mark. It just means spending money on people in military and British Aerospace systems rather than domestic civil servants.
Click to expand...
And even more than that - with the loan and the use of UKEF, we are backing ourselves to back Ukraine.
We'll get "the money" (there is no such thing when it comes to Government finance) back from a Ukraine not at war - probably via a mixture of actual money, trade terms, access to resources, and some narrow (Ukraine) and wider (Europe) soft power (including trade deals and political positioning)
 
markysimmo said:
Why am I racist for not wanting thousands of totally unchecked males who don't share our values in our country
Click to expand...
From your first post - You're a racist because you stated the people coming here are a threat to national security, and especially to women, because they come from somewhere else.
(You can add ageist and sexist to that)

From this post - because you've asserted "they don't share our value", based on nothing more than them being from somewhere else.

General - I retract the racist part, it was reductionist of me.
You are prejudiced. And, as an extension, fascist.

Re: my question. It is clear you still don't think you are a racist.
That's not a surprise - few racists have the capacity to understand that.
But, you are.
 
monkeybarry said:
I'm no nationist, nor a natural labour voter - but I feel proud to be British today.

Great work Mr Starmer.
With one act (and no small act - excellent leadership and politics) you've
Helped to protect Ukraine,
Set a sensible and reasonable platform for peace talks
Stuck two fingers up to Trumps bullying and shown him the way forward morally (his response will be very very interesting)
The loan and UKEF parts of the deal also give the UK the preferable position in getting paid back and future relations with Ukraine.

We've been a political basketcase since Cameron

Today feels like a change
Click to expand...
Really? Again I just don't get it. He and other European leaders are like Sheep following the new shepherd. Europe said the US had to do the heavy lifting in defending Ukraine. The US have told everyone to go f*** themselves. Now the tune has completely changed. Starmer has today acknowledged that Europe will have to do the heavy lifting in relation to Ukraine. The problem is we do not have the defence resources or capability, even when combined with other European countries,.to police any peace deal, or deter Russia from further aggression. As Annalise Dodds said in her resignation speech, the reality is that our defence budget will need yo be uplifted again and it will move upwards inexorably to cold war levels, as what the 2020s have shown so far is you can't trust Russia and you can't trust China.

Starmer isn't showing strong leadership, he's going with the inevitable flow. That's not a criticism of Starmer BTW. He has NO choice. Successive predecessor governmebts going back to the 80s have gutted our armed forces.
 
If we're going to send soldiers to the Ukraine as a peacekeeping force surely conscription will have to come back as our Armed Forces is tiny now

Can we make the illegals join the Army and fight for the country they so desperately travelled to get too ??
 
We've not got a huge amount really if these numbers are correct
Could be bolstered quite nicely by all the upstanding chaps who have come over in the last 5 years plus

As of April 1, 2024, the total strength of the full-time UK Armed Forces, including both trained and untrained personnel, was approximately 148,230. The distribution across the service branches was as follows:news.sky.com+4commonslibrary.parliament.uk+4researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk+4researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk+1commonslibrary.parliament.uk+1

These figures indicate a 20% reduction in personnel since 2012, when the total strength was 185,690. researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk

The full-time trained strength of the UK Armed Forces was 133,230 as of April 1, 2024. This includes personnel who have completed Phase 2 training in the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force, and Phase 1 training in the Army. news.sky.com+5fullfact.org+5researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk+5researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk+1fullfact.org+1

It's important to note that the size of the UK Armed Forces has been decreasing over the past decade. For instance, the British Army's strength fell from 79,139 to 75,983 in the 12 months leading up to September 2024. This trend has raised concerns about the UK's ability to meet its defense commitments. Additionally, as of December 2024, over 10,000 members of the UK Armed Forces were reported as "not medically deployable," further impacting operational readiness. the-independent.comtheguardian.com+1theguardian.com+1

In response to these challenges, the UK government has announced plans to increase defense spending. The Ministry of Defence has calculated that spending 3.6% of GDP on defense is necessary to modernize the military and fulfill NATO obligations, which would be a 56% increase from the current 2.3%. However, budget constraints and recruitment challenges continue to pose significant hurdles to expanding the size of the Armed Forces. ft.comthetimes.co.uk

Overall, while efforts are being made to address these issues, the UK Armed Forces are currently operating with reduced personnel numbers, impacting their capacity to respond to emerging global threats.
 
markysimmo said:
If we're going to send soldiers to the Ukraine as a peacekeeping force surely conscription will have to come back as our Armed Forces is tiny now

Can we make the illegals join the Army and fight for the country they so desperately travelled to get too ??
Click to expand...

Definitely. It’ll stop them from flytipping raping and eating our waterfowl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back