.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png.8488ab72b8bb2e508209bfe3211b6e08.png)
Will the future be very bad or fabulous?
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
Announcements
-
Topics
-
-
Latest posts...
-
60
-
0
World War III Has Already Begun": Ukraine's Former Military Chief Warns of Global Conflict
Ukraine's former military leader, Valery Zaluzhny, has issued a chilling warning, declaring that World War III is already underway as authoritarian regimes, including North Korea, Iran, and China, openly align with Vladimir Putin's Russia. Speaking at the UP100 award ceremony in Kyiv, Zaluzhny, now serving as Ukraine's envoy to the United Kingdom, emphasized the global scale of the conflict: “I believe that in 2024 we can absolutely believe that the Third World War has begun.” Zaluzhny pointed to a new reality on the battlefield, where Ukraine now confronts forces not just from Russia but from its allies. He cited reports that North Korea has sent approximately 10,000 soldiers to the Kursk region to support Moscow's military efforts. “As of this year, Ukraine is no longer facing Russia. Soldiers from North Korea are standing in front of Ukraine,” he stated. Tehran's support for Moscow has also become a key factor, with Iran providing thousands of Shahed drones to Russia and sharing technology for their production. Since the war's outbreak two and a half years ago, Ukraine claims that over 8,000 Iran-developed drones have targeted military installations and civilian areas. Zaluzhny denounced the attacks, saying, “Let’s be honest. Already in Ukraine, the Iranian 'Shahedis' are killing civilians absolutely openly, without any shame.” He added that Chinese and North Korean weapons were also being deployed against Ukraine. The geopolitical implications of the conflict have drawn strong responses from Western nations. Moscow’s ambassador to the UK recently accused Britain of being “directly involved” in the war following Ukraine’s use of British-supplied Storm Shadow missiles to strike Russian territory. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak rejected the claim, stating, “We’re not at war, but Ukraine certainly is.” Opposition leader Sir Keir Starmer condemned Russia’s aggressive stance, calling Putin’s rhetoric “irresponsible.” He added, “This war could end today if Putin stopped being the aggressor. Russia is the aggressor.” Amid these developments, questions loom over the readiness of Western militaries to respond to an escalation in Eastern Europe. Lt. Gen. Sir Rob Magowan, deputy chief of the British defence staff, assured Parliament that the British Army could fight immediately if necessary. “If the British Army was asked to fight tonight, it would fight tonight,” Magowan told the House of Commons defence committee. However, he acknowledged earlier this year that Britain’s military could face severe shortages of ammunition and equipment within two months of sustained conflict with Russia. Ukraine continues to appeal for increased military support from its allies. Kyiv’s use of advanced Western weapons, such as the US-provided ATACMS missiles and British Storm Shadows, marks a turning point in its defensive strategy. A recent attack on Kursk was reportedly the first use of Storm Shadows against Russian territory. Zaluzhny stressed the importance of robust international backing to halt the war’s spread. “It is still possible to stop it here, on the territory of Ukraine,” he said. “But for some reason, our partners do not want to understand this. Ukraine will survive with technology, but it is not clear whether it can win this battle alone.” Zaluzhny, often referred to as the “Iron General” for his leadership during the early stages of Russia’s invasion in February 2022, was removed as Ukraine’s military chief earlier this year. His contributions, including halting Russia’s initial advance, earned him widespread recognition. However, President Volodymyr Zelensky’s decision to replace top military brass in February raised eyebrows, signaling a strategic shift in Ukraine’s war effort. As the war grinds on, Zaluzhny’s warnings echo the broader concerns of a conflict spiraling into global proportions. With North Korea, Iran, and China solidifying their positions alongside Russia, the stakes continue to rise. For Zaluzhny, the message is clear: the world must act decisively to prevent the war from engulfing even more nations. Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-11-25 -
0
White House Retreats from Public Eye After Trump Victory
In the wake of Vice President Kamala Harris's significant loss to Donald Trump in the November 5 election, the White House has largely receded from the public spotlight. Both Harris and President Joe Biden have adopted subdued profiles, offering minimal engagement with the press and public. Harris, in particular, has made only sparse appearances around Washington before departing for Hawaii, while Biden has kept the media at a distance during a recent six-day foreign trip and subsequent meetings at the White House. The administration's reluctance to engage openly reflects the challenges of navigating the closing chapter of a lame-duck presidency. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre addressed concerns over Biden's limited press interactions, suggesting there may be more opportunities for engagement before the year’s end. “I get that you all want to hear from the president. I get that. I understand that,” Jean-Pierre said. “And I’m not saying that you won’t. You will. He will certainly continue to engage with all of you.” Critics, however, argue that this strategy could undermine Biden’s ability to shape his legacy. Michael LaRosa, a former aide and press secretary to First Lady Jill Biden, expressed disappointment in Biden’s approach. “I really wish he would start talking to the press, holding news conferences, and engaging with the media more frequently as I always believed he should be doing,” LaRosa said. He added that relying on scripted events might not serve the president’s long-term image. “Given his unceremonious and slapdash passing of the torch last July and the results of the election, one would think he would want to start framing his legacy on his terms, in his own words, and telling his story.” The political dynamics of the past year underscore these criticisms. Biden shocked many when, after a faltering performance in a June debate, he was persuaded to step aside from his re-election bid. His endorsement of Harris briefly energized her campaign, but it ultimately fell to the same divisive and combative political forces that brought Trump back to power. Harris has remained largely absent from the spotlight since delivering a concession speech the day after the election, making a brief appearance at Arlington National Cemetery on Veterans Day and another during a foreign leader’s visit to the White House. She was notably absent from Senate proceedings earlier this week, where Democrats moved to confirm judicial nominees ahead of the Republican takeover. Her absence has fueled questions about her priorities, particularly as Democratic staffers brace for unemployment come January. Jean-Pierre defended Harris’s time off, saying, “The vice president has taken time off to go spend time with her family. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. I think she deserves some time to be with her family and to have some downtime.” Meanwhile, Biden’s schedule included a closed-door meeting with North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper to discuss hurricane relief and a private Medal of Freedom ceremony for Cecile Richards, former president of Planned Parenthood. While private ceremonies can be requested by recipients' families, the lack of public engagement added to the perception of a president retreating from view. On Thursday, Biden returned to the public stage to welcome the Boston Celtics at a White House event, but by Friday, the administration again fell silent. The Bidens hosted a South Lawn dinner for longtime supporters, a gesture that some say should have been highlighted as a positive story for the White House. Biden’s reduced visibility has only amplified ongoing concerns about his age and mental fitness, with critics questioning his ability to complete his term. LaRosa urged a return to more active engagement, suggesting the first lady could play a role in encouraging Biden to step out of the shadows. “The bunker mentality did not serve him or the presidency well, and I hope in these final weeks, the first lady steps in again, lets him off the leash, and lets Biden be Biden at the end of his long career,” LaRosa said. “He didn’t come this far by being shy. Why now?” As the administration faces mounting pressure to define its legacy, the coming weeks will be crucial in determining how Biden and Harris choose to navigate the end of their tenure. Based on a report by The Hill 2024-11-25 -
0
Montreal Erupts in Violent Anti-Israel Protests
Violent clashes broke out in Montreal on Friday evening as anti-Israel protesters set cars on fire, smashed shop windows, and burned an effigy of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The protests, which began peacefully at around 4:30 p.m. at Émilie-Gamelin Park in downtown Montreal, quickly descended into chaos as night fell over the city. While the unrest unfolded, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau attended a Taylor Swift concert in Toronto, sparking outrage from members of the Jewish community and public officials. Quebec Senator Leo Housakos expressed his anger, writing, "Tonight, while Justin Trudeau is partying it up in Toronto, I was meeting with several members of the Jewish community of Montreal. Meanwhile, this is our hometown tonight. The pro-Hamas crowd emboldened by Mr. Trudeau’s pledge to arrest the Israeli PM. Hope you had fun at the concert, though, Justin." Social media was flooded with videos of the chaos, capturing the burning vehicles, shattered windows, and clashes with police. One user summarized the events by posting, "Crazy night is going over the city of Montreal, Canada, one huge chaos as anti-Israel protesters go into meltdown on the streets. People thought they would find their car in the morning, but the parked cars were set on fire tonight. To help Gaza. Our country is being destroyed over a conflict that doesn't even involve Canada in any way." The unrest in Montreal has drawn sharp criticism and ignited broader discussions about the appropriateness of such protests and the Canadian government's handling of related tensions. Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-11-25 -
0
Calls for a New Election Surge Amidst Labour's Challenges
A petition demanding a new general election has gained significant traction, amassing over 200,000 signatures as of publication. This number far exceeds the threshold required for the government to issue a formal response and triggers consideration for a parliamentary debate. The petition, created by Michael Westwood, has been widely circulated on social media since its launch on Wednesday. Westwood’s petition states, "I would like there to be another General Election. I believe the current Labour Government have gone back on the promises they laid out in the lead up to the last election." His call resonates with widespread discontent over perceived policy reversals by the Labour Party, which secured its mandate in the last election. According to the UK Government's petition platform, any initiative that garners 10,000 signatures prompts a response from the government. Reaching 100,000 signatures typically ensures that the matter is debated in Parliament. However, the government website notes that petitions may not be debated if the issue has already been recently addressed or is slated for discussion soon. The site clarifies, "MPs might consider your petition for a debate before it reaches 100,000 signatures." This surge in public dissatisfaction coincides with a tumultuous period for the government. Farmers have staged protests against inheritance tax reforms unveiled in the latest Budget, adding to the mounting pressures faced by Labour leadership. Compounding the party’s challenges, Prime Minister Keir Starmer's approval ratings have plummeted dramatically. Starmer, who initially entered office with positive public sentiment, now faces a stark reversal of fortunes. Think tank More in Common reports that his approval ratings have fallen to negative 38, reflecting the net difference between those who view his performance positively versus negatively. This marks a sharp decline from his early days in Downing Street when his rating peaked at a modest plus five and later rose to eleven in August. The Prime Minister’s tenure has been marked by what he describes as "tough choices," including controversial public spending cuts. These measures have included scaling back the Winter Fuel Allowance for millions of pensioners and ending the £2 bus fare cap. While these decisions aim to address economic challenges, critics argue they have alienated voters and dampened the optimism that initially buoyed Starmer’s leadership. As public dissatisfaction grows, the Labour government faces an uphill battle to rebuild trust. The petition's rapid rise in support underscores the growing sentiment that the party has strayed from its campaign promises. Whether this public demand will lead to a new general election remains to be seen, but it undeniably signals a turbulent road ahead for the current administration. Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-11-25 -
0
Boris Johnson Accuses Starmer of Aligning with Hamas Over ICC Netanyahu Arrest Warrant
Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has launched a scathing attack on Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, accusing him of "effectively standing with Hamas" following the International Criminal Court's (ICC) issuance of an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Writing in his Daily Mail column, Johnson alleged that Starmer and Labour have implicitly supported the ICC's actions, which also target former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes related to the Gaza conflict. Johnson criticized what he called Labour’s “acceptance of moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel," accusing the opposition party of equating “terrorists and their victims.” His comments reflect growing tensions surrounding the UK government’s stance on the ICC's decisions. While Downing Street affirmed its respect for the ICC's independence, it declined to rule out enforcing the arrest warrant if Netanyahu were to visit the UK. The UK, as one of the 123 member states of the ICC, is obliged to uphold the court's rulings. The ICC also issued a warrant for Hamas commander Mohammed Deif, whom Israel claimed was killed in an airstrike earlier this year. Johnson’s criticism extended beyond Starmer to the ICC itself. "Instead of standing with Israel, Starmer is effectively standing with Hamas—because he has cravenly endorsed the request, from the International Criminal Court, that the leaders of Israel should be charged with war crimes," Johnson wrote. He questioned the sincerity of Starmer’s past support for Israel, describing his previous expressions of solidarity following the October 7 Hamas terror attacks as “guff, hypocrisy, and blather.” He further argued that the ICC’s actions were misplaced, stating, “We are treating them like Slobodan Milosevic and Ratko Mladic, the butchers of the Balkans, when this ICC case is patently absurd. The Hague court is designed for tyrants—like Putin or Milosevic—who have no chance of facing justice in their own country. The ICC is supposed to ‘complement’ any potential failure of due process.” Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, also expressed alarm, labeling the ICC decision as “deeply concerning and provocative.” She warned that it could hinder efforts to release hostages and deliver critical aid to Gaza. International backlash against the ICC’s move has been swift, with the United States and allies condemning the decision. A White House spokesperson dismissed the arrest warrants, emphasizing the lack of US jurisdiction under the ICC and citing procedural flaws in the prosecutor’s actions. President Joe Biden’s administration expressed "deep concern" about the implications of the court’s rulings. Donald Trump’s allies also criticized the ICC, with his pick for National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, declaring on X: “The ICC has no credibility, and these allegations have been refuted by the US government.” Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-25 -
0
National Insurance Hike Threatens Care Home Stability Amid Budget Increases
The proposed rise in National Insurance (NI) contributions has sparked concerns over its significant impact on England’s adult social care sector, with experts warning that the additional costs could outweigh promised budget increases. Analysis from the Nuffield Trust indicates that these changes will cost care providers over £900 million next year—far surpassing the £600 million allocated to local authorities for social care in the recent Budget. This financial strain is compounded by broader cost increases, including planned rises in the national minimum wage, which collectively could burden the care sector with an additional £2.8 billion in expenses. Industry leaders and analysts are cautioning that such pressures could lead to widespread closures, fee hikes, and disruptions to essential services for vulnerable individuals. Natasha Curry, deputy director of policy at the Nuffield Trust, emphasized the precarious state of the sector. “Already fragile after a decade of cuts, runaway inflation, and the effects of Covid-19, adult social care was in desperate need of relief,” Curry said. She described the Budget as one that “gave with one hand and took away with the other,” warning that without urgent government intervention to cover employer National Insurance contributions (ENICs), the sector faces potentially “catastrophic” consequences. The planned increase of 1.2 percentage points in ENICs, coupled with a reduction in the earnings threshold for employer contributions from £9,100 to £5,000 by 2025/26, is expected to significantly elevate operating costs for care homes. The report highlights that many of the 18,000 providers delivering adult social care in England may be forced to raise fees, refuse council-funded clients, or shut down altogether. This would disproportionately affect smaller businesses, which are more vulnerable to financial pressures. Industry figures are also sounding alarms over the potential impact on state-funded individuals. Nadra Ahmed, chairman of the National Care Association, criticized the Labour government’s handling of the issue, accusing it of reneging on pre-election promises to prioritize the social care sector. “Some providers are facing £250,000 of extra annual costs because of the tax change,” Ahmed stated, warning that the NI hike could drive some care homes into bankruptcy. To address these challenges, the Government has pointed to potential council tax increases, which are projected to generate just over £2 billion for all council services, and new funding measures such as a £600 million grant for social care and an additional £86 million for the Disabled Facilities Grant. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson described the situation as an inherited crisis, stating, “We are determined to tackle the significant challenges and build a national care service so everybody can access the high-quality care they deserve.” However, critics argue these measures fall short. The Nuffield Trust report suggests that local authorities would need to allocate their entire council tax increases and the £600 million grant to social care just to offset the mounting costs. The Liberal Democrats have called for the social care sector to be exempt from the NI rise, advocating for immediate relief to prevent further destabilization. As the sector grapples with these financial pressures, many fear that rising costs will lead to a critical loss of capacity in an already overstretched system. Without swift government intervention, the reforms and relief measures intended to stabilize adult social care may arrive too late for many providers and the vulnerable populations they serve. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-25 -
0
The Strategic Threat of the Houthis Because of Inaction in Yemen
The rise of the Houthi movement in Yemen has transformed what was once a localized militia into a formidable regional threat with global implications. Since 2015, the United States and its allies have struggled to prevent Iran from significantly enhancing the Houthis’ military capabilities. Despite efforts to counteract this threat, the Houthis have emerged as a sophisticated force closely aligned with US adversaries, reflecting a failure in strategic containment. The United States has often sought to “avoid escalation” in response to Houthi provocations. Since October 2023, this approach has been marked by reactive measures that have neither deterred the Houthis nor degraded their military infrastructure. Consequently, the Houthis have gained invaluable insights into US defensive operations, potentially enhancing the efficacy of their attacks and sharing this intelligence with other adversaries. These developments risk undermining US strategic priorities, particularly in the Indo-Pacific, which has already been overshadowed by Middle Eastern operations over the past year. Iran’s support for the Houthis has been crucial in their evolution as a threat. By smuggling drones and missiles into Yemen—often in pieces and transported via sea and land—Iran has enabled the Houthis to amass an arsenal capable of targeting global shipping and US allies. Efforts by the United States and its partners to intercept these supplies since 2015 have achieved limited success due to vast distances and constrained resources. Smuggling has persisted during Yemen's ongoing conflict, with large dhows, fishing vessels, and uninspected cargo ships bringing in hundreds of truckloads of supplies. Combined with technical assistance from Iran and Hezbollah, these efforts have allowed the Houthis to build advanced missile systems and other weapons of strategic importance. The Houthis escalated their regional aggression in October 2023, launching drones and missiles toward Israel and formally aligning with Hamas in the ongoing conflict. These actions marked a significant escalation, yet the US response was predominantly defensive, avoiding direct measures to disrupt Houthi capabilities. As a result, the Houthis continued to intensify their attacks on international shipping and US warships, showing no signs of deterrence. By January 2024, after dozens of Houthi assaults, the US initiated strikes into Yemen. While these strikes disrupted some operations and destroyed limited infrastructure, they failed to significantly diminish the Houthis’ capacity or alter their trajectory. Observers have noted that Houthi attacks may have even grown more effective in 2024. A more assertive US response earlier in the conflict could have potentially mitigated the current threat. Targeting critical systems used by the Houthis for surveillance and attack coordination, such as disabling the Iranian spy ship Behshad, might have disrupted their capabilities. Other measures, such as economic sanctions on Houthi-controlled areas or supporting armed resistance groups within Yemen, could have undermined Houthi control in the region. While these actions carry inherent risks, they may have been more effective in curbing Houthi aggression than the restrained strategies employed. The failure to deter or disrupt Houthi escalations has forced US policymakers to focus on the Red Sea at the expense of priorities in the Western Pacific. This shift contradicts the stated US policy of prioritizing the Indo-Pacific and highlights the strategic costs of inaction. As the Houthis grow in sophistication and capability, the consequences of underestimating their threat have become increasingly clear, necessitating a recalibration of US strategy in the region. Based on a report by ISW 2024-11-25
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now