RayC

I'll assume that's the usual, 'I don't know'. On the off-chance that you are serious, please seek professional help asap.

So what would the 'full-strength' Brexit have looked like?

In that case, Russia should have supported Ukraine's desire to become a member of the EU as everything you mention are pre-conditions for membership to be granted. Ukraine withdrew its' application for NATO membership and reaffirmed its neutrality in 2010. This status formally remained until September 2022. Which contradicts the premise that Russia's "SMO" is a purely defensive measure. Apparently you believe all Russian actions can be justified. Even those committed as acts of revenge And there you have it. Zelensky has a mandate to govern. Was he a good peacetime President? Debatable. However, your inference that Zelensky - under pressure from the West - did not pursue a peaceable solution to the problems in Eastern Ukraine is nonsense. Zelensky - much to the annoyance of voters in the rest of Ukraine who believed that he was bowing to Russian pressure - agreed to a ceasefire with the separatists and to respect the results of a referendum in Donbass. Thus begins the conspiracy theories So Europe with failing economies, mounting debt, stubbornly high inflation, internal social unrest, tensions with both the US and China collectively decides that the best course of action would be to fuel the flames of conflict with Russia: Yep, that makes sense.

It's pointless providing links to overlong videos to support your proposition. These two videos are a case in point; their combined length is over two hours. Even if someone has the inclination to view them, few will have the time.

But Infantino said the award from "all of the football community". I can't remember voting, but then my memory's not what it used to be.

Come back Sepp Blatter, all is forgiven. It's just a matter of time before Infantino and Trump fall out. Neither will be happy at having to share the 'Worlds vainest narcissist' award with the other one.

I'll do that when I'M good and ready, Blaze. Stick me on 'Ignore' if you don't want to read my posts.

That's because you simply can't explain the unexplainable and justify the unjustifiable. Never mind.

Eurovision? I couldn't agree more.

Another Brexit benefit and of 'taking back control'.

You love this stuff?😱 Being banned from Eurovision is about the only valid justification for Russia's war in Ukraine (I grant you it's a strong one).

Top 15 countries by GDP in 2024 (Note: No cherry picking. 1st site in my Google search) 2024 United States: $25.43 trillion China: $14.72 trillion Japan: $4.25 trillion Germany: $3.85 trillion India: $3.41 trillion United Kingdom: $2.67 trillion France: $2.63 trillion Russia: $2.24 trillion Canada: $2.16 trillion Italy: $2.04 trillion Brazil: $1.92 trillion Australia: $1.69 trillion South Korea: $1.67 trillion Mexico: $1.46 trillion Spain: $1.41 trillion (Source: Safeguard Global) 11 non-BRICS out the 15 top nations suggests that BRICS countries' have a lot of catching up to do. So what bit of my contention that BRICS is no more than a catchy acronym for a loose grouping with no structure is incorrect? Let me know when you have a coherent counter argument.

BRICS is no more than a catchy acronym. As a group, it has no structure, constitution, values, etc; in short, there is nothing to bind this disparate group of nations together. That is not to say that the individual countries are unimportant. China certainly is; India increasing so. Russia not so much.

Oh, please. This nonsense is re-gugutated as often as the Ukraine/ NATO membership rubbish. How many more times does it have to be pointed out that the Maidan revolution was a popular uprising by the Ukrainian people against a President who - under pressure from Moscow - refused to implement the main pillar of the mandate on which he was elected i.e. the signing of the EU - Ukraine Association Agreement. The Yatsenyuk government which replaced the Yanukovych administration was elected by the Ukrainian parliament and later by popular vote, not by the US. Did the US government have a preference re the replacement for Yanukovych? Almost certainly. Did the US instigate a coup? No. Did the US pick the Ukrainian cabinet? No. To infer that this war is the fault of the West and that the blessed Vlad is simply a good guy fighting Nazis defies belief. I hope that you have left room on your buttock cheeks and the rest of your torso for these ridiculous conspiracy theories.

Ukraine's relationship with NATO is a red herring. This is all about Ukraine - an independent, sovereign nation - democratically deciding that it saw its economic future with the EU rather than Russia. And you think that this decision therefore justifies continual and continuous Russian aggression towards Ukraine and the invasions in 2014 and 2022?

What nonsense? The nonsense is spouted by those who try to distort events and the timeline to excuse Russian aggression. 2008: NATO said that Ukraine would eventually join the alliance. June 2010: Ukrainian parliament voted to abandon the goal of NATO membership and reaffirm its neutrality February 2014: Maidan revolution March 2014: Russia annexes Crimea, August 2014: Russia invades eastern Ukraine December 2014 Ukraine's parliament voted to seek NATO membership February 2022: Russia invades Ukraine Based on that timeline, what was the justification for Russia's annexation of Crimea and invasion of eastern Ukraine? The Maidan revolution? This had nothing to do with NATO membership and everything to do with Yanukovych's refusal to enact the mandate on which he was elected i.e. to sign the EU - Ukraine Association Agreement. And what about the invasion in 2022? What aggressive act by NATO was the catalyst for this event? That's right; there wasn't one. Ahh but, the Russian apologists say, Ukraine did state that they wanted NATO membership in December 2014. Yes, following Russia's actions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. I'd say that was a fair enough response given Russia's naked aggression, wouldn't you?

Complete and utter tosh. How many times does this point have to be made? Ukraine formally withdrew its pursuit of NATO membership in June 2010, when its parliament passed a law declaring the country non-aligned and neutral: Ukraine did not formally re-apply for NATO membership until September 2022 after Russia invaded its territory.

Yes, let's take what Putin says at face value. Commenting about military drills on Ukraine's border in January 2022, Putin said: "These drills are purely defensive and are not a threat to any other country".

Nice family get together.

The Baltic States joined NATO in 2004, so if Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a reaction to that event, it's been a long time coming! After decades of neutrality, both Finland and Sweden decided to join NATO in 2024. Care to hazard a guess why? I'd say that Russia's invasion of Ukraine might have something to do with it.

Right. Everyone knows that Putin is a man of peace. He says so, so it must be true. In the same way that it's true that France, Germany and the UK have all invaded countries recently. They are the ones hell bent on war. Oh, hold on a minute ........

Excellent post but I suggest you give it up. It's a hopeless task. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories but, if this book project looks like it might get off the ground, what are the odds of Mr. M-W succumbing to an unforeseen ,unfortunate accident/disease/illness?

Agreed That they will probably be bilingual

The EU Settlement Scheme, quite correctly, allowed EU citizens who wished to settle in the UK permanently the chance to do so. However, the end of freedom of movement closed the door on those who were either seasonal or transient workers, a loss for both the worker - who obviously loses a source of income - and the UK which loses the ability to plug seasonal and/or temporary gaps in the labour market. It's a truism to say that a UK citizen can "very easily (work in an EU member state) with a residency permit": The difficulty is that it is anything but easy to obtain a residency permit in the first place unless the individual has family ties and/or is being sponsored. The bottom line is that freedom of movement was good for the individual UK national and good for the UK labour market.