RayC

Deleted. Duplicates Candide's post (Note to self: Read the latest posts before replying🤦)

Deleted. Duplicates Pickwick's post.

"(The UK) had a socialist leaning society back then (in the 1980s)". The same society in the same decade which happened to elect Margaret Thatcher as PM on three consecutive occasions. You couldn't make this stuff up although apparently you can.

US companies have land holdings throughout the world so I don't understand what point you are trying to make.

The USSR no longer exists. Ukraine became a sovereign nation in 1991. Her resources are her own.

The economic cost of WW2 was huge. It wrecked the economies of Europe. There was rationing of food in many countries long after hostilities ended. Was all that hardship worth it? Undoubtedly yes given the alternative. The same is true today wrt Ukraine.

Then it's simple. Get Biden to stand down (any which way) and problems solved: Two birds with one stone so to speak. On the other hand, the chances of Trump standing aside voluntarily are about as slim as me becoming President (and I wasn't born in the US).

Given the extremely poor performance by Ensemble! in the recent European elections, I find it difficult to understand why Macron believed that the French electorate would turn to him in a national election. While Macron was far short of a majority in the French parliament prior to this recent election, he was able to get some legislation passed by horse trading with some of the Les Républicains MPs and by using Presidential Executive Orders (Article 49.3 provision). Both those options are now off the table. Imo Macron joins an ever increasing list of PMs/ Presidents who have put their own personal ambition before that of the country.

Obviously COVID, wars, etc affected all politicians' ability to pursue their goals, but even allowing for these events, imo Macron's record will be viewed as mixed at best. Like most politicians, Macron had successes and failures. On the economic front, his liberalisation of the overly restrictive French labour laws could be labelled a success. On the other hand, the imposition of the regressive petrol tax - which led to the rise of the 'Gilets Jaunes' - was unsurprisingly a failure both economically and socially. Macron's foreign policy exploits run a similar course. Imo his hard line against Putin is the morally correct course of action but his criticism of the US, Turkey and others is unnecessary and alienates allies. However, imo history will ultimately judge Macron on the basis of one event i.e. the calling of this unnecessary election and its' aftermath. Why did he call it? Imo largely because he is an arrogant narcissist, traits which he displayed on numerous previous occasions. I usually agree with @JonnyF about as often as Halley's Comet makes an appearance but, on the occasion, imo he makes some valid points: France is now left in a political mess. It is hard to see how it can be governed effectively until the next presidential election in 2027. It may also be the case that the second round of the Presidency will be a contest between Le Pen and Melenchon. If that happens, France and EU will need all the help it can get.

I've just spoken with H. and he's naturally extremely disappointed with your reactions. Nevertheless, he said that your're always welcome at his place if you change your minds.

Proves what? Given that Starmer was a member of the Labour Young Socialists while at school and the Labour club at university, I'd hazard a guess that there's a fair chance that he voted Labour in any elections.

Don't forget women and the working class. Democracy in the UK has never been the same since those groups were allowed to vote. I blame the Whigs and their progressive ideas.

National Rally conspired in exactly the same way by not standing in seats where The Union of the Far Right had candidates more likely to win. Presumably you also think that National Rally have made a massive strategic error which will backfire?

Given that NATO and Russia are both nuclear powers, the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction - which has the appropriate acronym MAD - would probably ensure that in the event of Russia launching a first strike nuclear attack Moscow, St. Petersburg and various other Russian cities will be razed to the ground. There is a simple solution: Putin withdraws Russian troops from Ukraine and respects Ukraine's international borders. Unfortunately, that outcome is about as likely as me winning the €50m Euro millions jackpot.

Thanks for posting that interesting article. The UK acting in isolation isn't going to greatly affect emissions, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't act: Someone has to take the lead. Imo all nations act in what they perceive as being in their own best interests rather than on behalf of "Team World".

Russian propaganda. Starmer pledged to continue the support shown to Ukraine by the previous Tory administrations which imo is the correct thing to do. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rferl.org/amp/uk-elections-ukraine-labour-starmer/33022866.html

I agree that the cost of net zero should be estimated, although that that calculation will involve a lot more complexity than some basic maths. Notwithstanding that, in your original post you seemed to reject "globalism"*? How can the UK thrive if it does? * Tbh I am never sure what people mean when they reject "globalism/ globalisation"? What is the alternative? Acting in isolation? Imo that is both undesirable and impractical.

How does an individual nation thrive then?

You either believe in FPTP or you don't. Which is it?

And you can supply no evidence to support your contention that the UK's relative "success" is due to Brexit. Moreover, you are cherry picking your countries and timescales to use as a comparison. Why not include Italy? If the UK/ Germany are similar in scale, so are the UK/ Italy. Why not set the timeline to July 2016 or February 2020? In any event, absolute size means little. Exports make up 50% of Germany's GDP vs. <30% of the UK's. A slowdown in the world's economic growth was always going to hit them harder. Having a (imo) weak Chancellor and government doesn't help either. I made no doomsday predictions. I believed that Brexit would have negative effects for the UK in almost all regards e.g. economically, culturally, diplomatically, etc. Almost all the research and reports to date have shown that to be the case. You claimed that Brexit would be beneficial for the UK. To date, there is little to suggest that is the case. Maybe being 6,000 miles away has shielded you from the facts.

Yes it is ridiculous, but you were less vocal about the result of the 2019 election when the Tories got an 80-seat majority with 43% of the vote.

Sorry busy morning. Anyway, I'm here now. And you attribute that "outperformance" to Brexit? Be good to see your workings. Btw since the referendum vote the UK has underperformed France on an annualised GDP growth basis (Source: World Bank)

It will be like Brexit then, with the responsible party unwilling to be accountable for its' failure (to date).

These are still isolated incidents albeit, unfortunately apparently on the increase. Why would acts of violence against homosexuals make liberals feel good about themselves? That makes no sense. Still no comment about the other racist incident?

You're way out in your timings! It's a shame that your post hasn't got an exact time-stamp. I'd hazard a guess that it took <2 minutes for the Labour hating comments to start.