| Not much mention of Trump confirming 16:28 - Dec 9 with 2213 views | giant_stow |
He wants to back Russia and interfer in european elections. Seems like a pretty big deal to me. |  |
| |  |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 22:53 - Dec 9 with 468 views | NthQldITFC |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 22:26 - Dec 9 by WeWereZombies |
Are you suggesting that he cannot tell the difference between his rhea end and his elbow ? |
That's quality that is, just be a little bit cassowary that the EFFBEEEYE don't come a knockin'. |  |
| |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 23:55 - Dec 9 with 418 views | WicklowBlue |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 17:30 - Dec 9 by mellowblue |
With Europe collective leadership is definitely an issue unless all opinions are aligned. And they never are, different agendas etc. |
I actually think on the Trumpain era that having counterbalance is good politics wise.
This may actually be the EUs strength in time when just barrelling down a certain path is no good for anyone.
The power in DC, will start to switch post midterms. When both party's start to think about their next candidates.
Trumps ratings are poor, he is in his final term. Perhaps pandering to him works but lets be real here, the EU commentary is a distraction end of. |  | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 02:07 - Dec 10 with 371 views | Kropotkin123 |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 17:13 - Dec 9 by Radlett_blue |
Exactly. Does Europe want Trump to abandon NATO - which he conceivably might do?
Trump was right to cajole European countries for neglecting defence & leaving USA as their defender - why should the USA do this, when China is now their rival superpower?
That's why Ukraine is in such a bind - it isn't America's war but the Europeans don't have the stomach for it. |
why should the USA do this, when China is now their rival superpower?
China, their rival, has propped up Russia financially and diplomatically.
Russia getting territory through military force, with the US abandoning allies and dismantling institutions that Russia and China have been trying to break up for decades is a clear message to China that the US can't be trusted to back up Taiwan and nations in the South China Sea against China.
Also, it was the US the set it up. This is their world order and it has been in their interest for ~80 years. You don't just give up on the institutions you built and maintain your interests the second they get tested and you want to look at a bigger fish.
Furthermore, the US has an obligation to Ukraine based on its deal to remove nuclear weapons, and the war has come about because they have pushed democracy to Eastern Europe. [Post edited 10 Dec 2:10]
|  |
| Submit your 1-24 league prediction here -https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/514096/page:1 - for the opportunity to get a free Ipswich top. | | Poll: | Would you rather | | Blog: | Round Four: Eagle |
| |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 08:02 - Dec 10 with 310 views | DJR |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 17:12 - Dec 9 by Churchman |
Well, Trump makes a good point about Europe talking and not doing. On that he is right. Look at the U.K. - promises to do this and do that but it’s doing less than nothing because successive governments have done nothing but pillage and hollow out defence. This and the last governments have had their heads in the sand for years now feeding off the peace dividend. Still doing it too.
Promises to increase spending to less than half what it needs to be possibly by 2034 isn’t going to cut it. Like fresh water crocodiles in Egypt, they’re in de nile. And don’t tell me there’s no money. The Chancellor found bucket loads for what interested her in the budget, just like the tories threw it around like confetti during Covid and when they started to wet the bed over the Brexit shambles.
Trump and Putin understand power. There is no ‘wrong’, just strength and weakness. If you can take what you want it’s yours. Literally nothing else matters to them. These are very very simple men. No amount of talk, empty promises a handshake with King Charley, free suit and designer free glasses is going to change that.
Trump vision is a world with spheres of influence. Russia has Europe, America their continent and parts of the far east and China the rest. A peaceful world. So why shouldn’t Putin determine elections here? Might is right.
Unless the weedy Europeans want to do something about it, which bar those under imminent threat, is unlikely. |
That strikes me as rather harsh on Europe.
Europe has upped defence spending even in the face of the consequences of the economic sanctions against Russia, and probably already has the conventional forces to defeat Russia were it to try to invade a European NATO country.
The issue at hand is Ukraine, and I am not sure anyone is suggesting that Western nations get directly involved, although maybe it will come to that if the US walks away completely. In any event, I believe Europe has now taken over all the funding of military and other support to Ukraine, given the US has stopped, so it can't be said that its support is not substantial.
As it is, it difficult to have predicted that the US would go back on 70 years of history, but if we are to have to go it alone, then might consideration have to be given to creating a European nuclear weapon strength comparable to that of Russia? That would certainly be costly!
Finally, the US's position appears to be driven by a contempt for Europe based to a large degree by racism, which is nicely summed up by the following from an article in today's Guardian.
"Where Trump’s point of departure was once the failure of Europe to contribute sufficiently to its own security, he has now embraced a more alarming vision.
Coloured both by racism and a staggering contempt for Europe’s political institutions and leaders, he has warned of the risk of civilisational collapse on a continent he barely knows, and that he has viewed more often from the window of an armoured sedan.
His interview with Politico, lacking in any clear ideological coherence, is replete with something else: the confused fear of an ageing white man confronted with a changing world.
A paranoid Maga worldview is behind the horrors of America’s own immigration, policing and other policies under Trump – and has driven an effort to erase Black experience and representation.
Now – it is clear – those fears are Washington’s prism for understanding Europe.
From this perspective, immigration from the developing world causes a dilution of European countries, making them “weak” under “stupid” leaders and setting the circumstances for their own demise. It is an unabashedly racist theory, with Trump and his circle making clear their prescription is that far-right European parties are to be supported.
While the broad sweep of Trump’s race baiting in general is not a revelation, it is important to understand its meaning in the wider context of European security.
For Trump and his Maga acolytes, including Elon Musk – who has called in recent days for the European Union to be broken up – all politics and diplomacy are essentially transactional. But where once Trump argued that Europe wasn’t paying its fair share, his point is now that a decadent Europe is fundamentally undeserving because of its multiculturalism.
In his interview with Politico, Trump joins up these dots himself in a kind of exercise in wish fulfilment. Russia’s Vladimir Putin, he concedes, wants Europe to be weak. Trump calls it weak, and in exposing the fissures between Washington and Europe prompted by his remarks, he aids Putin by actively weakening Europe – while denying it is his “fault”.
All of which is playing out at the most consequential moment for Europe since the second world war, with a devastating conflict in Ukraine and amid escalating Russian provocations elsewhere on the continent."
This is also worth a read.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/10/trump-security-strategy-eu [Post edited 10 Dec 8:19]
|  | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 09:09 - Dec 10 with 278 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 08:02 - Dec 10 by DJR |
That strikes me as rather harsh on Europe.
Europe has upped defence spending even in the face of the consequences of the economic sanctions against Russia, and probably already has the conventional forces to defeat Russia were it to try to invade a European NATO country.
The issue at hand is Ukraine, and I am not sure anyone is suggesting that Western nations get directly involved, although maybe it will come to that if the US walks away completely. In any event, I believe Europe has now taken over all the funding of military and other support to Ukraine, given the US has stopped, so it can't be said that its support is not substantial.
As it is, it difficult to have predicted that the US would go back on 70 years of history, but if we are to have to go it alone, then might consideration have to be given to creating a European nuclear weapon strength comparable to that of Russia? That would certainly be costly!
Finally, the US's position appears to be driven by a contempt for Europe based to a large degree by racism, which is nicely summed up by the following from an article in today's Guardian.
"Where Trump’s point of departure was once the failure of Europe to contribute sufficiently to its own security, he has now embraced a more alarming vision.
Coloured both by racism and a staggering contempt for Europe’s political institutions and leaders, he has warned of the risk of civilisational collapse on a continent he barely knows, and that he has viewed more often from the window of an armoured sedan.
His interview with Politico, lacking in any clear ideological coherence, is replete with something else: the confused fear of an ageing white man confronted with a changing world.
A paranoid Maga worldview is behind the horrors of America’s own immigration, policing and other policies under Trump – and has driven an effort to erase Black experience and representation.
Now – it is clear – those fears are Washington’s prism for understanding Europe.
From this perspective, immigration from the developing world causes a dilution of European countries, making them “weak” under “stupid” leaders and setting the circumstances for their own demise. It is an unabashedly racist theory, with Trump and his circle making clear their prescription is that far-right European parties are to be supported.
While the broad sweep of Trump’s race baiting in general is not a revelation, it is important to understand its meaning in the wider context of European security.
For Trump and his Maga acolytes, including Elon Musk – who has called in recent days for the European Union to be broken up – all politics and diplomacy are essentially transactional. But where once Trump argued that Europe wasn’t paying its fair share, his point is now that a decadent Europe is fundamentally undeserving because of its multiculturalism.
In his interview with Politico, Trump joins up these dots himself in a kind of exercise in wish fulfilment. Russia’s Vladimir Putin, he concedes, wants Europe to be weak. Trump calls it weak, and in exposing the fissures between Washington and Europe prompted by his remarks, he aids Putin by actively weakening Europe – while denying it is his “fault”.
All of which is playing out at the most consequential moment for Europe since the second world war, with a devastating conflict in Ukraine and amid escalating Russian provocations elsewhere on the continent."
This is also worth a read.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/10/trump-security-strategy-eu [Post edited 10 Dec 8:19]
|
Thanks for posting that - good summary
Trump and MAGA are a disaster for global stability
Does Putin have something on him?
Is he in effect a Russian asset?
Or is he just an old racist/confused/not very bright puppet who is partly a puppet for a deeper force
How do Reform see these views - as puppies of Trump how do they see a weak Europe/UK
It's heartbreaking seeing ordinary working people being so widely and deeply conned by the far right
It's heartbreaking the support Yavley Lennon is generating
History is repeating itself and millions could lose their lives in the fight to preserve real freedom and democracy freedom
The people who really annoy me are the pseudo intellectuals who justify all this with false equivalence of the far right with democrats or Labour
The far right is a whole new ball game and all people need to wake up to that
Trump is a traitor to the US
Farage is a traitor to the UK
Wake up people |  | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 09:13 - Dec 10 with 273 views | Radlett_blue |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 08:02 - Dec 10 by DJR |
That strikes me as rather harsh on Europe.
Europe has upped defence spending even in the face of the consequences of the economic sanctions against Russia, and probably already has the conventional forces to defeat Russia were it to try to invade a European NATO country.
The issue at hand is Ukraine, and I am not sure anyone is suggesting that Western nations get directly involved, although maybe it will come to that if the US walks away completely. In any event, I believe Europe has now taken over all the funding of military and other support to Ukraine, given the US has stopped, so it can't be said that its support is not substantial.
As it is, it difficult to have predicted that the US would go back on 70 years of history, but if we are to have to go it alone, then might consideration have to be given to creating a European nuclear weapon strength comparable to that of Russia? That would certainly be costly!
Finally, the US's position appears to be driven by a contempt for Europe based to a large degree by racism, which is nicely summed up by the following from an article in today's Guardian.
"Where Trump’s point of departure was once the failure of Europe to contribute sufficiently to its own security, he has now embraced a more alarming vision.
Coloured both by racism and a staggering contempt for Europe’s political institutions and leaders, he has warned of the risk of civilisational collapse on a continent he barely knows, and that he has viewed more often from the window of an armoured sedan.
His interview with Politico, lacking in any clear ideological coherence, is replete with something else: the confused fear of an ageing white man confronted with a changing world.
A paranoid Maga worldview is behind the horrors of America’s own immigration, policing and other policies under Trump – and has driven an effort to erase Black experience and representation.
Now – it is clear – those fears are Washington’s prism for understanding Europe.
From this perspective, immigration from the developing world causes a dilution of European countries, making them “weak” under “stupid” leaders and setting the circumstances for their own demise. It is an unabashedly racist theory, with Trump and his circle making clear their prescription is that far-right European parties are to be supported.
While the broad sweep of Trump’s race baiting in general is not a revelation, it is important to understand its meaning in the wider context of European security.
For Trump and his Maga acolytes, including Elon Musk – who has called in recent days for the European Union to be broken up – all politics and diplomacy are essentially transactional. But where once Trump argued that Europe wasn’t paying its fair share, his point is now that a decadent Europe is fundamentally undeserving because of its multiculturalism.
In his interview with Politico, Trump joins up these dots himself in a kind of exercise in wish fulfilment. Russia’s Vladimir Putin, he concedes, wants Europe to be weak. Trump calls it weak, and in exposing the fissures between Washington and Europe prompted by his remarks, he aids Putin by actively weakening Europe – while denying it is his “fault”.
All of which is playing out at the most consequential moment for Europe since the second world war, with a devastating conflict in Ukraine and amid escalating Russian provocations elsewhere on the continent."
This is also worth a read.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/10/trump-security-strategy-eu [Post edited 10 Dec 8:19]
|
Most of Europe - especially the largest 3 economies - has not upped defence spending. As usual, they've talked about it. Poland, Finland & the Baltic states have, understandably, increased their defence spend.
If Europe isn't willing to take on Russia (and they're not) Putin has a fairly free hand as Trump has made it clear that this isn't America's fight. Yes, they are effectively supplying Ukraine with weapons. |  |
| |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 10:37 - Dec 10 with 242 views | ElderGrizzly |
I don’t think Trump knows what he is saying half the time
|  | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 10:48 - Dec 10 with 227 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 10:37 - Dec 10 by ElderGrizzly |
I don’t think Trump knows what he is saying half the time
|
Tump appealed to US voters. To my mind he is a front man, someone putting his foot in the door, who won’t last long.
We should be more concerned about a Vance presidency.and those behind him. Once established he has a good chance of an eight yesr run. If that happens US will be a very different place thsn it currently is. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 10:55 - Dec 10 with 220 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 10:48 - Dec 10 by Pinewoodblue |
Tump appealed to US voters. To my mind he is a front man, someone putting his foot in the door, who won’t last long.
We should be more concerned about a Vance presidency.and those behind him. Once established he has a good chance of an eight yesr run. If that happens US will be a very different place thsn it currently is. |
There was a view within several Western Governments I worked with during his first term and I've said on here before, that he was a political 'trojan horse' to simply get the Republicans back in power after Obama.
He was never expected to last his full 1st term.
Does MAGA and that direction last under Vance? It's the same here with Reform and Farage. Remove him and the whole thing is wholly more unelectable for those he appeals to. [Post edited 10 Dec 10:56]
| | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 12:25 - Dec 10 with 183 views | Herbivore |
It's interesting that Trump and Vance continue to Wang on about freedom of speech in Europe and how we are undermining civil liberties while in the US we're seeing frequent examples of stuff like this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1dz0g2ykpeo |  |
| |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 12:34 - Dec 10 with 170 views | WeWereZombies |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 08:02 - Dec 10 by DJR |
That strikes me as rather harsh on Europe.
Europe has upped defence spending even in the face of the consequences of the economic sanctions against Russia, and probably already has the conventional forces to defeat Russia were it to try to invade a European NATO country.
The issue at hand is Ukraine, and I am not sure anyone is suggesting that Western nations get directly involved, although maybe it will come to that if the US walks away completely. In any event, I believe Europe has now taken over all the funding of military and other support to Ukraine, given the US has stopped, so it can't be said that its support is not substantial.
As it is, it difficult to have predicted that the US would go back on 70 years of history, but if we are to have to go it alone, then might consideration have to be given to creating a European nuclear weapon strength comparable to that of Russia? That would certainly be costly!
Finally, the US's position appears to be driven by a contempt for Europe based to a large degree by racism, which is nicely summed up by the following from an article in today's Guardian.
"Where Trump’s point of departure was once the failure of Europe to contribute sufficiently to its own security, he has now embraced a more alarming vision.
Coloured both by racism and a staggering contempt for Europe’s political institutions and leaders, he has warned of the risk of civilisational collapse on a continent he barely knows, and that he has viewed more often from the window of an armoured sedan.
His interview with Politico, lacking in any clear ideological coherence, is replete with something else: the confused fear of an ageing white man confronted with a changing world.
A paranoid Maga worldview is behind the horrors of America’s own immigration, policing and other policies under Trump – and has driven an effort to erase Black experience and representation.
Now – it is clear – those fears are Washington’s prism for understanding Europe.
From this perspective, immigration from the developing world causes a dilution of European countries, making them “weak” under “stupid” leaders and setting the circumstances for their own demise. It is an unabashedly racist theory, with Trump and his circle making clear their prescription is that far-right European parties are to be supported.
While the broad sweep of Trump’s race baiting in general is not a revelation, it is important to understand its meaning in the wider context of European security.
For Trump and his Maga acolytes, including Elon Musk – who has called in recent days for the European Union to be broken up – all politics and diplomacy are essentially transactional. But where once Trump argued that Europe wasn’t paying its fair share, his point is now that a decadent Europe is fundamentally undeserving because of its multiculturalism.
In his interview with Politico, Trump joins up these dots himself in a kind of exercise in wish fulfilment. Russia’s Vladimir Putin, he concedes, wants Europe to be weak. Trump calls it weak, and in exposing the fissures between Washington and Europe prompted by his remarks, he aids Putin by actively weakening Europe – while denying it is his “fault”.
All of which is playing out at the most consequential moment for Europe since the second world war, with a devastating conflict in Ukraine and amid escalating Russian provocations elsewhere on the continent."
This is also worth a read.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/10/trump-security-strategy-eu [Post edited 10 Dec 8:19]
|
Egypt have qualified for next year's World Cup and Mo Salah will probably be there, good piece on him just appeared on the BBC website:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cjezk98ny81o
'He will always be trying to prove someone wrong," says former Liverpool team-mate Adam Lallana.
"He is not macho. I would often tell my children about how he behaves, how he doesn't get too high in good moments, doesn't beat himself up too much in low moments. He would always remain completely focused on the job in hand. I would look at him and it would make me feel calm because of how in control he would be all the time.Knowing Mo, he will always be fighting, being resilient, and trying to find ways to better himself"' Remind you of anyone else ?
'"He is a really nice guy, considering the success he has had - being a superstar around the globe," says James Milner - Liverpool's vice-captain during most of Salah's time at the club.
He plays as if he has a chip on his shoulder. He wants to be the best at everything - he even got a chess teacher to improve his game, and gave me a thumping a good few times."'
'Salah has proudly made his faith visible throughout his career - he prays both when walking onto the pitch and after scoring goals. "When I first met Mo, he was coming here quite regularly," says Shafique Rahman - Imam at Liverpool Mosque and Islamic Institute. "He would arrive a little bit late after finishing training. We had people waiting outside who wanted to see him, but nobody would bother him during prayer. The nature of the religion is that everybody is the same in the eyes of God. When people come to prayers they stand extremely close, touching each other's shoulders. Mo felt very safe here."'
'"To succeed in Europe you have to understand the culture of where you are playing, where you are living, without losing any of your principles," says former Egypt striker Mido, who played for Tottenham, Roma and Ajax among others. "This is the balance that he has achieved."'
So I hope Mo gets a chance to sit down with JD Vance over there and explain a few things to him. |  |
| |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 12:54 - Dec 10 with 154 views | Churchman |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 09:13 - Dec 10 by Radlett_blue |
Most of Europe - especially the largest 3 economies - has not upped defence spending. As usual, they've talked about it. Poland, Finland & the Baltic states have, understandably, increased their defence spend.
If Europe isn't willing to take on Russia (and they're not) Putin has a fairly free hand as Trump has made it clear that this isn't America's fight. Yes, they are effectively supplying Ukraine with weapons. |
Posted in the Defence Journal. I’ve no idea of it’s accuracy so feel free to challenge:
‘Of the surface escorts (ships) you would be very lucky to get 3 available for operations, and the T23s are on their last legs. Of their replacements the T31 were designed for constabulary duties and with no sonar are pretty useless for warfighting roles in the North Atlantic. Add to that only 1 tanker operational, no solid support ships and hardly enough mine warfare capacity to keep even 1 port open reliably.
The Army side is worse still, with just 1 battery of 155mm guns, obsolete tanks and IFVs, almost no working UAVs, no and pitifull ammunition stocks.
The RAF are the only force that currently have real warfighting potential – but those 7 FGR4 squadrons typically are down to 10 aircraft with minimal reserves (following retirement and scrapping of the Tranche 1 aircraft), and don’t have the trained pilot ratio essential for warfighting. Also the 2 F-35 squadrons have no stand-off attack weapons and inadequate spares and engineering support for a wartime tempo.
All in all the UK, once a mainstay of European NATO strength, is now becoming irrelevant as Germany ploughs ahead with a huge recruitment programme and capability expansion.’
In other words, it’s a hollowed out, spent military with little capability. Reliance on Trump’s America is total. Good luck with that.
But worse is that there is no prospect of this government doing anything about it beyond another review and Starmer trying and failing to look important. Putin’s intentions have been perfectly clear for years. Trump has been around a long time too.
The laying off of responsibility for protecting ourselves has gone on for decades now and that won’t change. Heads are cemented in the sand, not buried and successive governments are just not interested.
The U.K. and the other shameful European nations have given the green light to Putin to take what he pleases. That is what power is and is how nutters like him and Trump operate. The days of relying on America like parasites are over.
The current mob and their predecessors just don’t believe it. The situation won’t change and the scrapyards will stay busy until we are left with the Battle of Britain Flight - unless that’s flogged off too. |  | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:17 - Dec 10 with 134 views | Radlett_blue |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 12:54 - Dec 10 by Churchman |
Posted in the Defence Journal. I’ve no idea of it’s accuracy so feel free to challenge:
‘Of the surface escorts (ships) you would be very lucky to get 3 available for operations, and the T23s are on their last legs. Of their replacements the T31 were designed for constabulary duties and with no sonar are pretty useless for warfighting roles in the North Atlantic. Add to that only 1 tanker operational, no solid support ships and hardly enough mine warfare capacity to keep even 1 port open reliably.
The Army side is worse still, with just 1 battery of 155mm guns, obsolete tanks and IFVs, almost no working UAVs, no and pitifull ammunition stocks.
The RAF are the only force that currently have real warfighting potential – but those 7 FGR4 squadrons typically are down to 10 aircraft with minimal reserves (following retirement and scrapping of the Tranche 1 aircraft), and don’t have the trained pilot ratio essential for warfighting. Also the 2 F-35 squadrons have no stand-off attack weapons and inadequate spares and engineering support for a wartime tempo.
All in all the UK, once a mainstay of European NATO strength, is now becoming irrelevant as Germany ploughs ahead with a huge recruitment programme and capability expansion.’
In other words, it’s a hollowed out, spent military with little capability. Reliance on Trump’s America is total. Good luck with that.
But worse is that there is no prospect of this government doing anything about it beyond another review and Starmer trying and failing to look important. Putin’s intentions have been perfectly clear for years. Trump has been around a long time too.
The laying off of responsibility for protecting ourselves has gone on for decades now and that won’t change. Heads are cemented in the sand, not buried and successive governments are just not interested.
The U.K. and the other shameful European nations have given the green light to Putin to take what he pleases. That is what power is and is how nutters like him and Trump operate. The days of relying on America like parasites are over.
The current mob and their predecessors just don’t believe it. The situation won’t change and the scrapyards will stay busy until we are left with the Battle of Britain Flight - unless that’s flogged off too. |
You're right - but I don't think we can blame Starmer for this.
Germany has now actually done something about it, creating a €100bn special fund & amending its constitution.
I'm sure many people agree that we should spend more money on defence, but how popular would UK tax rises, or cuts in government spending, be to fund increased defence expenditure? | |
| |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:22 - Dec 10 with 132 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 12:25 - Dec 10 by Herbivore |
It's interesting that Trump and Vance continue to Wang on about freedom of speech in Europe and how we are undermining civil liberties while in the US we're seeing frequent examples of stuff like this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1dz0g2ykpeo |
No wonder he wants ‘Freedom of Speech’ when he considers this not above the law
[Post edited 10 Dec 13:29]
| | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:45 - Dec 10 with 95 views | Churchman |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:17 - Dec 10 by Radlett_blue |
You're right - but I don't think we can blame Starmer for this.
Germany has now actually done something about it, creating a €100bn special fund & amending its constitution.
I'm sure many people agree that we should spend more money on defence, but how popular would UK tax rises, or cuts in government spending, be to fund increased defence expenditure? |
I’m not purely blaming Starmer. Successive governments have taken no interest in defence whatsoever for decades. Cameron’s crowd surpassed themselves by reneging on the agreement they had with the US and Russia over guaranteeing Ukraine. They did nothing whatsoever about the Salisbury poisonings in terms of recognising threat and deliberately allowed our military to melt away. Didn’t care, weren’t interested.
Successive governments tended to put in useless idiots as defence ministers so they’d cause no trouble. Who can forget my former MP and a complete tool Michal Fallon or the Labour bloke Geoff (Buff)Hoon? They weren’t bunged in for their competence that’s for sure.
Where Starmer is accountable is for empty words, inaction and inertia. Shaking hands and brown nosing Trump is not action. It’s purely show stuff to look statesmanlike and to ignore what needs doing. If in doubt, hold the third defence review in four years. But even if he wanted to do something, I doubt his party will allow him to and as we all know, the party comes first in politics and has done for decades.
If Starmer was honest and said ‘look, you may disagree but we’ve other priorities so defence will have to wait’ that’d be a policy choice. It’s what in reality they are doing. I would not blame him for making a decision. That’s democracy and what he is there to do, even if I disagreed with it. But don’t snowjob it with handshakes, earnest looks and useless talking shops with other nobodies like Macron. | | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:49 - Dec 10 with 93 views | Radlett_blue |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:45 - Dec 10 by Churchman |
I’m not purely blaming Starmer. Successive governments have taken no interest in defence whatsoever for decades. Cameron’s crowd surpassed themselves by reneging on the agreement they had with the US and Russia over guaranteeing Ukraine. They did nothing whatsoever about the Salisbury poisonings in terms of recognising threat and deliberately allowed our military to melt away. Didn’t care, weren’t interested.
Successive governments tended to put in useless idiots as defence ministers so they’d cause no trouble. Who can forget my former MP and a complete tool Michal Fallon or the Labour bloke Geoff (Buff)Hoon? They weren’t bunged in for their competence that’s for sure.
Where Starmer is accountable is for empty words, inaction and inertia. Shaking hands and brown nosing Trump is not action. It’s purely show stuff to look statesmanlike and to ignore what needs doing. If in doubt, hold the third defence review in four years. But even if he wanted to do something, I doubt his party will allow him to and as we all know, the party comes first in politics and has done for decades.
If Starmer was honest and said ‘look, you may disagree but we’ve other priorities so defence will have to wait’ that’d be a policy choice. It’s what in reality they are doing. I would not blame him for making a decision. That’s democracy and what he is there to do, even if I disagreed with it. But don’t snowjob it with handshakes, earnest looks and useless talking shops with other nobodies like Macron. |
Agreed, Starmer has been a disappointingly weak leader. Unfortunately, like most modern politicians, he's not going to say "we're not going to spend more money on defence because we can't afford it", he's going to continue to make promises that he knows he won't deliver. And a long history of this is why the public don't trust modern politicians so are willing to turn to the likes of Trump & Farage. | |
| |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:58 - Dec 10 with 82 views | iamatractorboy |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:22 - Dec 10 by ElderGrizzly |
No wonder he wants ‘Freedom of Speech’ when he considers this not above the law
[Post edited 10 Dec 13:29]
|
Loathsome. But sadly, this will score points rather than lose them for his appalling voters. |  | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 14:09 - Dec 10 with 74 views | StokieBlue |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 19:16 - Dec 9 by GlasgowBlue |
Good luck with that. Europe is 5 years minimum away from being in any kind of position to defend itself without the help of the USA. That's before we even get into our trading relationship. |
What are you basing that on?
Europe would be able to defend itself from Russia based on the actual real world example we have seen in Ukraine rather than scenarios based on hypothetical analysis.
SB |  | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 14:15 - Dec 10 with 60 views | Churchman |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 13:49 - Dec 10 by Radlett_blue |
Agreed, Starmer has been a disappointingly weak leader. Unfortunately, like most modern politicians, he's not going to say "we're not going to spend more money on defence because we can't afford it", he's going to continue to make promises that he knows he won't deliver. And a long history of this is why the public don't trust modern politicians so are willing to turn to the likes of Trump & Farage. |
Turning to Trump and Farage - that’s a real danger, but you can see why it happens. | | | |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 14:21 - Dec 10 with 55 views | Radlett_blue |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 14:09 - Dec 10 by StokieBlue |
What are you basing that on?
Europe would be able to defend itself from Russia based on the actual real world example we have seen in Ukraine rather than scenarios based on hypothetical analysis.
SB |
Hmm..leaving nuclear weapons to one side, Europe's defence capability versus Russia presents a mixed picture: Russia holds a significant edge in sheer land forces (mass, tanks, artillery) and mobilization, while Europe (especially as NATO) leads in technology, air power, naval strength, and advanced systems, but faces critical shortfalls in ammunition, integrated air defence, and US support reliance.
That having been said, the big issue is willingness to accept death, even of combat troops. Russia has probably lost at least 150,000 troops in the Ukraine war so far. Can you possibly imagine European leaders being willing to contemplate such losses? | |
| |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 14:27 - Dec 10 with 47 views | mellowblue |
| Not much mention of Trump confirming on 14:09 - Dec 10 by StokieBlue |
What are you basing that on?
Europe would be able to defend itself from Russia based on the actual real world example we have seen in Ukraine rather than scenarios based on hypothetical analysis.
SB |
Agree, militarily Russia is pretty hollowed out now (to steal a Churchman phrase). I think Europe is fairly content with the status quo in Ukraine. There might be European meetings on peace deals , backing Ukraine's corner but they must be well aware those terms are so askance to the US/Russian stance that peace is pretty unlikely. And I think it suits Europe to let Russia bleed itself for many months more. Maybe not on human grounds but on the strategic practicalities of delaying any Russian rebuild. Meanwhile Ukraine slowly loses land and lives. And we really need time to address the changed realities of warfare; drones etc. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
