|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 12, 2024 12:55:07 GMT
Bouncing along but not quite recession. "There are early indications that Black Friday sales contributed to a recovery in UK growth in November but the data continues to show a picture of flatlining growth. The UK economy returned to growth in November, according to official figures that are being closely watched amid fears the prospect of recession remains on a knife edge. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported an early estimate for output growth of 0.3% for the month - recovering from a 0.3% decline witnessed in October when many weather-sensitive sectors were hit by heavy rain. The data showed retail was a major contributor to that growth as Christmas shopping got into gear with Black Friday sales." news.sky.com/story/economy-grew-by-0-3-in-november-but-recession-remains-a-threat-13046572 |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Jan 14, 2024 11:45:10 GMT
Watched Politics Live yesterday. The Conservative Home (?) representative made a prediction that Labour will get a majority of 40-60 depending on how bad the SNP implosion is. ...the website? Doesn't matter who it actually was, any side facing an inevitable loss has to do something to energize the local activists and voters in general to still make an effort. That was arguably the biggest lesson the Conservatives learnt in 1997 - if you're going to lose regardless, at least be planning for 3-5 years time... ...the Conservatives will lose by 150-170 seats. I don't think it will be the whitewash some people expect but there are so many unusual factors in play (including the SNP) that the 'traditional' polling may well struggle again... |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 14, 2024 11:50:33 GMT
Watched Politics Live yesterday. The Conservative Home (?) representative made a prediction that Labour will get a majority of 40-60 depending on how bad the SNP implosion is. ...the website? Doesn't matter who it actually was, any side facing an inevitable loss has to do something to energize the local activists and voters in general to still make an effort. That was arguably the biggest lesson the Conservatives learnt in 1997 - if you're going to lose regardless, at least be planning for 3-5 years time... ...the Conservatives will lose by 150-170 seats. I don't think it will be the whitewash some people expect but there are so many unusual factors in play (including the SNP) that the 'traditional' polling may well struggle again... The polls are likely to narrow naturally in reality as we approach the GE, a lot depends on unforseen events and the "£ in the pocket'. Next big test will be the Rwanda vote, will the two wings of the Conservatives hold their noses and vote through what neither like for party unity? |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 14, 2024 23:59:12 GMT
I see the Telegraph is headlining a poll which suggests the Conservatives will only retain 169 seats giving Labour a 120 seat majority.
Are they just trying to scare Sunak into making certain policy decisions, such as toughening up the Rwanda bill, watering Fownhope net zero and tax cuts at the next Budget?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Jan 15, 2024 9:19:39 GMT
Interesting I thought Houthi might go positive for Sunak, but listening to radio today - people don’t seem happy at all
|
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Jan 15, 2024 12:37:21 GMT
Interesting I thought Houthi might go positive for Sunak, but listening to radio today - people don’t seem happy at all Sunak is beyond redemption with Tory grass root loyalists, the centre no longer believes him and the general population doesn't like him. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 18, 2024 0:28:18 GMT
Peter Oborne regretting Brexit (20 minute mark) and goes on to savage Sunak et al.
|
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,502 
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 22, 2024 23:36:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 23, 2024 23:10:34 GMT
Infighting now in public.
"Former cabinet minister Sir Simon Clarke is calling on Rishi Sunak to resign as prime minister.
The Tory MP for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, who served as housing secretary under Liz Truss, wrote in an article for The Telegraph: "We have a clear choice. Stick with Rishi Sunak, take the inevitable electoral consequences, and give the Left a blank cheque to change Britain as they see fit.
"Or we can change leader, and give our country and party a fighting chance."
Sir Simon, a staunch ally of Mr Sunak's short-lived predecessor, was one of 11 Conservative MPs to vote against the prime minister's Rwanda bill last week after what was mooted to be a sizeable rebellion fizzled out after attempts to toughen up the scheme failed.
Citing last week's controversial Telegraph poll showing the Tories would win just 169 seats at the next election, he wrote: "The unvarnished truth is that Rishi Sunak is leading the Conservatives into an election where we will be massacred."
He also says Tory "extinction is a very real possibility" if Nigel Farage enters the political arena once again.
He goes on: "And it is now beyond doubt that whilst the prime minister is far from solely responsible for our present predicament, his uninspiring leadership is the main obstacle to our recovery.
"Rishi Sunak has sadly gone from asset to anchor."
And despite praising the PM's strengths, he adds in a damning indictment: "He does not get what Britain needs. And he is not listening to what the British people want."
He calls for a chance of leader to someone "who shares the instincts of the majority and is willing to lead the country in the right direction", or "we will recover strongly in 2024".
His intervention comes amid myriad struggles for the prime minister, including falling approval ratings and unhappiness from across the political divide with the Rwanda deportation plan.
Sir Simon has also been critical of government policy on housing and wind power."
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 23, 2024 23:46:43 GMT
So, Jeremy Hunt may well have £20bn to play with. What to do? Increase health, education, defence? Pay off some debt? Make tax cuts?
This tweet gives some options:
|
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Jan 24, 2024 3:31:29 GMT
So, Jeremy Hunt may well have £20bn to play with. What to do? Increase health, education, defence? Pay off some debt? Make tax cuts? It'll be the most interesting budget for many years because of the upcoming election. I would assume there will be tax cuts because you don't want to hand the incoming Labour government more surplus cash than you have to and anything you spend it on now i) you won't get credit for and ii) even if you did it wouldn't win you the election... ...Labour have a manifesto problem - they have 7 or more different spending pledges all funded by a 'backdated' windfall tax on 'energy giants'. Freezing energy bills at either the September or April 2022 levels (both pledged at different times and depending on what audience they're talking to) will cost between £8-13bn and cutting VAT on energy costs a further £4bn. Freezing fuel duty will cost £5bn, and their home insulation funding plan will also cost an estimated £5bn. With this same money (a 'backdated' windfall tax on 'energy giants') they also want to freeze council tax (£3bn), extend small business rates relief (£2bn) and create an energy-intensive industry fund of £1 billion. By my maths that's now around £28bn 'spent', but even if they can enforce a backdated windfall tax on energy giant's profits at 78% they'll only raise (based on their own estimates) £8-13bn... Hunt won't be leaving them any extra cash coming in, politically he'll be much better forcing them to either raise taxes or miss their manifesto commitments in their first term... |
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,502
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 25, 2024 0:33:49 GMT
Arguments against this ?
Gina Miller;
As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage.
It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort.
The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe.
For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority.
That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea?
That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent.
As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage.
It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort.
The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe.
For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority.
That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea?
That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 25, 2024 2:04:15 GMT
Arguments against this ? Gina Miller; As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage. It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort. The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe. For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority. That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea? That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent. As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage. It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort. The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe. For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority. That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea? That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent. It's the 1930s all over again, this time though we've bought ourselves time by supporting Ukraine. Sanders is trying to shake our collective compliancy and governments of all colours have allowed the reduction and hollowing out of our forces and skills to atrophy. Provided we stay together then we are fine, divide and conquer is Putin's only real advantage. That includes Trump. Oh, happy birthday Yatton. 🎂 |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 25, 2024 2:19:19 GMT
So, Jeremy Hunt may well have £20bn to play with. What to do? Increase health, education, defence? Pay off some debt? Make tax cuts? It'll be the most interesting budget for many years because of the upcoming election. I would assume there will be tax cuts because you don't want to hand the incoming Labour government more surplus cash than you have to and anything you spend it on now i) you won't get credit for and ii) even if you did it wouldn't win you the election... ...Labour have a manifesto problem - they have 7 or more different spending pledges all funded by a 'backdated' windfall tax on 'energy giants'. Freezing energy bills at either the September or April 2022 levels (both pledged at different times and depending on what audience they're talking to) will cost between £8-13bn and cutting VAT on energy costs a further £4bn. Freezing fuel duty will cost £5bn, and their home insulation funding plan will also cost an estimated £5bn. With this same money (a 'backdated' windfall tax on 'energy giants') they also want to freeze council tax (£3bn), extend small business rates relief (£2bn) and create an energy-intensive industry fund of £1 billion. By my maths that's now around £28bn 'spent', but even if they can enforce a backdated windfall tax on energy giant's profits at 78% they'll only raise (based on their own estimates) £8-13bn... Hunt won't be leaving them any extra cash coming in, politically he'll be much better forcing them to either raise taxes or miss their manifesto commitments in their first term... I agree Hunt will spend it. I'd go for a bit for school rebuilding after the recent news, something to placate Martin Lewis 😉 and the rest on tax cuts. Most likely a reduction in some or all of: Income tax, possibly VAT and/or Corporation tax, Stamp Duty and IHT. |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Jan 25, 2024 6:10:51 GMT
Arguments against this ? Gina Miller; As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage. It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort. The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe. For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority. That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea? That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent. Since the UK is no longer in the EU then (as we always emphasised whilst we were a member) NATO is the key way to defend Western (and now Central) Europe from aggression by Russia or anyone else...if nothing else the command and control structures are already in place and tested regularly, politically everyone gets on and key objectives/policies are already set in stone - in fact that's why WW3 has not yet started.... |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 25, 2024 8:53:37 GMT
Arguments against this ? Gina Miller; As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage. It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort. The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe. For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority. That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea? That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent. Since the UK is no longer in the EU then (as we always emphasised whilst we were a member) NATO is the key way to defend Western (and now Central) Europe from aggression by Russia or anyone else...if nothing else the command and control structures are already in place and tested regularly, politically everyone gets on and key objectives/policies are already set in stone - in fact that's why WW3 has not yet started.... Nato command and control needs US inclusion in reality as no other member state really has the capacity to do it on a large scale. As for politics, Orban may disagree, as could Trump. There's a reason Vlad is playing for time and undermining confidence in Ukraine’s abilities. |
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Jan 25, 2024 10:47:59 GMT
Since the UK is no longer in the EU then (as we always emphasised whilst we were a member) NATO is the key way to defend Western (and now Central) Europe from aggression by Russia or anyone else...if nothing else the command and control structures are already in place and tested regularly, politically everyone gets on and key objectives/policies are already set in stone - in fact that's why WW3 has not yet started.... Nato command and control needs US inclusion in reality as no other member state really has the capacity to do it on a large scale. As for politics, Orban may disagree, as could Trump. There's a reason Vlad is playing for time and undermining confidence in Ukraine’s abilities. My thoughts exactly |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 25, 2024 13:54:01 GMT
No change to MoT rules.
"A plan to extend the time between car MOTs has been scrapped - to the delight of campaigners who warned Britain's roads could end up full of faulty vehicles.
The Department for Transport had been looking at requiring MOTs every two years instead of one - and delaying a new car's first MOT from the third to fourth year.
The plan, devised by Boris Johnson's government, was billed as potentially saving Britons £100m a year - but experts thought it was dangerous.
They also dismissed the money saving claim, with the AA suggesting an annual MOT saved motorists between £200 and £400 by picking up faults early.
The DfT announced today the proposal had been ditched following a consultation - though changes to MOTs are still being looked at.
Roads minister Guy Opperman said: "We have listened to drivers and industry, and keeping MOTs in their current form shows once again that we are on the side of motorists."
Jakob Pfaudler, CEO at the AA, welcomed the decision, saying 83% of its members polled "overwhelmingly supported" the annual test."
|
|
|
|
Post by gulfofaden on Jan 25, 2024 21:49:54 GMT
Arguments against this ? Gina Miller; As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage. It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort. The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe. For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority. That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea? That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent. As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage. It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort. The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe. For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority. That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea? That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent. You have to be completely ignorant to examine the conflict in Ukraine and deduce that the Russian federation is trying to invade Europe. Note - not “Putin”. Classic manipulation tactic to personality an enemy, Goldberg style 2 minute hate coming next. You might be willlng to be manipulated into a war but I’m not. They will need conscription given all the fighting age men in this country have been brought up to believe their flag is shameful so they aren’t going to fight for it. Suddenly masculinity isn’t so toxic when they want your sons to go and die for corporate interests abroad. Russian people are not stupid, neither are their government and institutions. They are normal people, like us. They have their reasons for Ukraine which if any of you had deigned to read Wikipedia for an hour or two you’d understand quite quickly that this isn’t a war of conquest. It’s a reclaimation of territory, protection of its allied citizens and securing security for their Navy. Note that the RF’s wars have mostly been in its doorstep with neighbouring states and Europe/America have been fighting the worlds poorest people for control of their resources since the end of the Second World War, just after the US fried a load of women and children alive with atomic weapons to threaten the Soviet Union (basically). Be careful when deducing who the good guys and aggressors are bechase the media is pretty crafty. They did it with Iraq and they’re doing it right now. |
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,502
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 25, 2024 22:07:13 GMT
Arguments against this ? Gina Miller; As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage. It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort. The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe. For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority. That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea? That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent. As people absorb the provocative speech by General Patrick Sanders, Chief of General Staff - it is merely a warning at this stage. It's interesting he says "mobilisation, reservists or conscription". It's quite right that conscription is the last on that list and a last resort. The genie is out of the bottle with the invasion of Ukraine, and it's absolutely crucial that NATO remains strong and that NATO countries support them as we have been doing. This is an extremely worrying problem on our doorstep in Europe. For getting on a century now, we have relied on the US for our security. But that partnership is in peril with the possibility of Trump 2.0. Even with Biden in the White House he can't get congressional approval for the spending he wants to support Ukraine, and the American people are increasing against getting involved in foreign wars or peace keeping. They believe China is the bigger threat and that means supporting Europe and the UK is less of a priority. That means Europe must be serious about its own security. For years in this country, we have had hysteria in the right wing press about the spectre of a European Army where all members contribute. But when we're faced with this reality of Putin beating a path to the borders of the European Union, doesn't serious European co-operation on defence begin to sound a good idea? That's surely essential and as major global player it would be bizarre and indefensible if the UK didn't play its part in securing the future of democracy and freedom on our own doorstep and continent. You have to be completely ignorant to examine the conflict in Ukraine and deduce that the Russian federation is trying to invade Europe. Note - not “Putin”. Classic manipulation tactic to personality an enemy, Goldberg style 2 minute hate coming next. You might be willlng to be manipulated into a war but I’m not. They will need conscription given all the fighting age men in this country have been brought up to believe their flag is shameful so they aren’t going to fight for it. Suddenly masculinity isn’t so toxic when they want your sons to go and die for corporate interests abroad. Russian people are not stupid, neither are their government and institutions. They are normal people, like us. They have their reasons for Ukraine which if any of you had deigned to read Wikipedia for an hour or two you’d understand quite quickly that this isn’t a war of conquest. It’s a reclaimation of territory, protection of its allied citizens and securing security for their Navy. Note that the RF’s wars have mostly been in its doorstep with neighbouring states and Europe/America have been fighting the worlds poorest people for control of their resources since the end of the Second World War, just after the US fried a load of women and children alive with atomic weapons to threaten the Soviet Union (basically). Be careful when deducing who the good guys and aggressors are bechase the media is pretty crafty. They did it with Iraq and they’re doing it right now. Bit ranty , what you trying to say ? 🙄😂 |
|
