RayC

Completely incorrect. Firstly, RU (presumably Russia?) has achieved nowhere near its' goal of destroying Ukrainian nationalism. Secondly, at this moment in time, Zelensky has the support of the people. Maybe postwar, he will befall the same electoral fate as another wartime leader. But that will be decided at another time. The Ukrainian government and, more importantly, people seem to be resolute in their defiance of Putin despite the hardships they are enduring. As long as that is the case, imo the West has a moral duty to support them.

The fact that the individual was arrested whilst carrying a Union Jack is neither here nor there. He could just as easily been carrying a shopping bag. Neither action is a criminal offence. The clip which you reposted claimed that the individual was arrested for flying a Union Jack. The onus is on you to supply supporting evidence to support this claim.

Not that you can read this as you put me on 'Ignore' but I completely agree. Second post of yours inside an hour with which I've agreed. World's going mad!

The last thing that the UK needs is an authoritarian, extreme right-wing bigot without an ounce of empathy as leader of one of its' major political parties. Worrying times.

Absolute nonsense. As the article suggests, Braverman is doing the exact opposite of what a good, decent Home Secretary should do. Instead of supporting the police, she instead undermines them at every opportunity. Would you prefer the EDF vigilantes to be policing the streets of the UK?

Excellent article. It's hard to believe - and an extremely scary thought - that this woman might be leading the Tory party within the next 18 months. Hopefully, there are enough decent Tory MPs and members left to ensure that this doesn't happen.

Flying a Union Jack is not a criminal offence, so he must have been arrested for a real offence.

Why single out 'ordinary' Muslims and those on the political left? It also implies that 'ordinary' Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Atheists, Agnostics, etc and those on the political right aren't concerned enough to organise a protest.

In England - I'm not sure if different rules apply elsewhere in the UK - anyone has the right to organise a protest: large or small; one-off or regularly scheduled. The police should be advised 6 days in advance, although not doing so would not necessarily prevent the protest from going ahead. I guess the answer to your question is that no one has sought permission to organise such a protest(s)?

If he had left it unsaid, no doubt someone would have pointed it out. Damned if you do ......

Ukraine is demanding no more than a return of the land seized by Russia since 2014. It is an entirely reasonable and justified demand and imo should be a pre-requisite for the commencement of any talks. You can apply hypothetical counterfactuals to anything: With the benefit of hindsight, I'm sure that pre-WW2 British governments would have framed a different strategy in Palestine. Allowing Russia to obtain the 4 oblasts and Crimea would be a reward for acts of naked aggression. Unfortunately, the longer the war continues the more deaths on both sides there will be. That is a truism. Support from the EU is not wanting. Hopefully, the US will soon vote through a further aid package for Ukraine. Please refer to the thread entitled, "Avdiivka about to fall?". Thaibeachlovers holds a similar view to you and we had a long exchange there in which I offered counterarguments. That conclusion rests on the assumption that a Russian victory is inevitable. That is by no means certain

I'm unclear about your point? Do you think that those demands are reasonable or not?

Condemn racism in whatever form it takes. Stop illegal immigration while at the same time allowing genuine refugees asylum. There is "no colonization of the indigenous British people by hate groups". You are fantasizing from afar. Ensure that those who have proven themselves to be unfit for high political office are removed by democratic means asap. Unfortunately, it is very unlikely that Braverman will lose her seat at the next election. We can only hope that Tory MPs voting for their next leader are sane enough to prevent this mad woman from getting into the run-off: If Johnson and Truss were bad (they were), Braverman would plunge new depths.

The displaced could be granted refugee status by Suella Braverman.

If so, then the police are going to be very busy. Would be interesting to see the methodology which gave rise to your estimate.

Tricky one for Sunak. Allow Braverman to remain in post and he will be accused of being weak; she will be emboldened and continue to be the 'enemy within'. Sack her and the 'Flat Earth Brigade' within the CPP will probably be in open revolt. Gold dust to Labour as we move towards the next election.

Given that he appears to have a fair few people on 'Ignore', he will probably end up talking to himself. Probably for the best.

I'd rather he stayed until the next election. Sunak is far from perfect but at least he isn't 'Mad' Suella.

Perhaps we could form a club and have the occasional 'get together'? I'll bring cake.

(Presumably, you won't read this post but, nevertheless, I'll make the point). This was bound to happen: You realise that your argument is lost, but rather than either a) admit this or b) let the matter quietly drop (by not responding further), you make a public show of playing the 'Ignore' card. Sad (but, of course, that's just my subjective opinion).

I doubt that many people who support Ukraine in this conflict are blind to the fact that corruption exists there. In the context of this war it is irrelevant. Ukraine is engaged in a war to preserve its' identity. The problem of corruption can be addressed later (hopefully, after an Ukrainian victory). Likewise, I imagine that most people are well aware that companies involved in defence-related activities make good profits from a war.

You might have asked the same question of the average British Tommy in WW2. The answer is that they were (are) fighting for their freedom and liberty. (Note: I am not discounting the role played by US and Commonwealth troops. It is simply that those countries would not have fallen to the Nazis). No one is suggesting that Putin is trying to exterminate a race but what he is trying to do is extinguish Ukrainian nationalism: There is also a parallel in Hitler's expansionism and that of Putin. (My previous paragraph also refers). I think that everyone would like the hostilities to end asap. However, the simplest way for that to happen would be an immediate withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine. Unfortunately, unless Putin can be removed this is unlikely, therefore the war will continue.

Do you admire Shakib Al Hasan by any chance? https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/67333235

You seem very keen to determine how Central and East Europeans should live their lives. So what they needed post-WW2 was to have their liberty and rights removed and to live under a murderous tyrant. You seem to be in favour of something similar today.

What I have been doing is refuting your arguments, some of which are factually incorrect: However, we still return to the same point. You lay the blame for the war in Ukraine at the feet of Zelensky. I make the obvious point - which you still refuse to accept - that if there had been no invasion, then there would be no war (at least not on this scale). You are either an appeaser and apologist for Putin or a supporter who considers his actions justifiable. What does "Only in NATO countries" mean/ refer to in this context? Nation's/ Tribes have fought (probably) since Mankind has existed and will continue to do so ..... And? I have no idea how this addresses my point and/or what point you trying to make? So on the one hand, you criticise the West for not intervening to support (presumably?) Hungary and Czechoslovakia in the '50s and '60s but, on the other, you criticise the West for involving itself in this conflict!!