So, he publicly disseminated the names of a bunch of Afghan civilians. Many of them disappeared and are presumed dead. But the Taliban did not announce why they killed them, so no harm, no foul. Neat.
I think not being America is a great starting point for liking a country. Up there with not being Russia. However, not being China is up there too. My friend’s wife is Chinese. Her dad was a high ranking policeman in China. He is vastly wealthy. Why? Because if you have a high rank in china you can abuse everyone below you and take what you want. It isn’t corruption as we see it. It is state sponsored corruption. I hate the corruption in the UK and the US but it just isn’t on China’s level. China is not a good place to live: https://freedomhouse.org/country/china/freedom-world/2021
Well done Schad....jumping from 'presumed dead', to 'why they killed them' without any proof. It's the American way.
An investigation by the Unite Union has revealed the rampant profiteering that is responsible for much of the inflation in the UK. The first link is a short “explainer leaflet”, the second is a 4 page summary and the third is the full 157 page report. https://www.unitetheunion.org/media/5450/unite-exposes-crisis-of-profiteering.pdf https://www.unitetheunion.org/media...ofiteering-across-the-economy-march-2023.docx https://www.unitetheunion.org/media...cross-the-economy-its-systemic-march-2023.pdf
Always pays to follow the money, or to borrow a legal phrase, to ask 'cui bono?' https://guardian.pressreader.com/article/281569475018795
I mean, many of them disappeared, have been gone for many years now, and are treated as dead by their families. It's pretty likely that they didn't just pop round to the store, but you are free to believe what you wish, I suppose? Perhaps the alien craft with deposit them all back in Kabul, any day now.
It is curious to see that no one here seems that interested in what has been going in on Scotland where I feel Nicola Sturgeon's reputation is being trashed. I would have expected the printed press to have laid in to her as soon as she had resigned as leader but i have been surprised just how hostile the Labour Party has become. The anti-Rishi posters have been rightly condemned by the likes of John McDonnell and a few other right-minded individuals who correctly recognise this as an extension of the unreasonable abuse heaped on Jeremy Corbyn. Alot of the calls for enquiries and sniping in Scottish politics has been coming from the Labour Party who sniff another chance to appear to be relevant North of the border. I would admit to Nicola Sturgeon being a marmite kind of politician - her attitude to what goes on in England and her perceptions are often unreasonable. However, you have to counter-balance this with her achievements north of the border and the almost cultish following she had acquired which meant that the SNP were pretty much unassailable. Her fall from grace has been spectacular and it has been fascinating how the expenditure of £600k has been used as a stick with which to beat her The irony is that both the Conservatives and Labour have almost certainly been far more culpable of misdismeanors but this has left Sturgeon in a position of having been perceived to have thrown stones whilst living in a glass house. It will be fascinating to see if her husband and herself end up facing criminal charges for wrong-doing. The narrative coming from the other political parties and the press is suggestive that they are willing this to happen and for the SNP to be discredited. You can certainly view this as the chickens coming home to roost for Nicola Sturgeon yet, there is a "guilt by association" narrative against the new leader Humza Yousef that has been pedelled by , amongst other the BBC. I find this a bit troubling and potentially as much an issue for the BBC as the Lineker, business. The tone of all articles and broadcasts regarding the new SNP leader have largely been biased against him before he has had a chance. I have not seen one article that has not stressed the the difficulties he is experiencing. I don't think the lack of funds for the SNP is a major issue. As soon as Starmer gets elected, I can almost guarantee that this will motivate the SNP as the Labour leader has a tin ear towards Scotland's desire to be independent. You can appreciate why Starmer wants to paint as black a picture as possible regarding the SNP yet this will quickly re-bound against them. I would be the least surprised if the whole affair blows over and Sturgeon will be resurgent. Constitutionally it is fascinating but I think this will ultimately prove to be small potatoes for the SNP. I cannot see this business taking Sturgeon down and just expect this to be managed by the party. The way the whole matter has been reported (particularly south of the border) is indicative to me that both the press and the Labour party are looking for a bit of pay back. I would be really disappointed if there was genuinely criminality involved which out an entirely different spin on circumstance, however, I just think this seems too unreaslistic.
I don't have a dog in that fight Ian, so I'm not really bothered about what's going on in regional politics as I haven't got a vote. Some might be more interested, but I don't think Scottish politics has much effect on England dwellers so it's marginally interesting at most. When something happens in US politics, the effects can be global quite quickly. It probably just delays haggis deliveries when the Scottish government does anything interesting.
https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2...-for-child-sex-abuse-and-trafficking-of-girls Good to see the start of what is hopefully many more arrests for this sort of thing. Sentences aren’t harsh enough though
SC I have to disagee , I am afraid! When it comes to looking at UK politics in the future, two politicians will be ear-marked for study when the first quarter of the 21st century is analysed. The first will be Jeremy Corbyn who was a fraction away in 2016 from leading the Uk's fist, genuinely Socialist governement and whose profile still casts a shadow over politics. I think the second politician will be Nicola Sturgeon who was denied the chance of a second independence referendum which would have been succesful and led to the break-up of the UK. I would have to say that Sturgeon should resonnate in England because she has shown , not only how a divulged government can better reflect the will of people locally, but more importantly she has proposed an agenda which is far more progressive than the Labour Party. I do not feel any other political leaders in the UK have shaken the political establishment since the first Labour government in the 1920s. Breaking up the UK would have had massive , global implications. The Uks place on the UN security council will have disappeared and Scotland's future membership of the EU would dminish parts of the English economy with the financial sector finding Scotland to be more favourable than London. England's political clout would have vanished and a leaer like Sturgeon would effectively ensure that Scotland would punch above their weight. There would also be massive implications in Ireland with unification accelerated and more viable. Militarily, Scotland would have denied England access to bases like Fasline and the shipyards north of the border would no longer be producing ships for the Navy. For importantly, had Sturgeon got her wish, I feel she would have set a precedent for Progressive politics that would have had repercussions throughout the western world. The issue of gender recognition would have been one of these. I am not saying I am a fan of Nicola Sturgeon but I am saying that she is a hugely important and signigicant figure in European politics. You can entirely understand why newspapers like the Telegraph are running with headlines looking to see Sturgeon hung out to dry. I think the Establishment and certainly Westminister politicians want to see her destroyed. In my opinion, this is really bad for democracy - the effective silencing of the will of 50% of the population in Scotland.
I would add Attlee and Thatcher to your list of politicians that may have shaped the fabric of British society, while the importance of the GFA may well be the source from which the UK drags itself back from the brink of isolation and economic ruin.
A lot of ifs, buts and maybes in there. Starting with that sturgeon would have won a referendum. This is not a guarantee. If I remember rightly the latest holyrood elections, in terms of actual votes did not get to 50% of people voting for pro independence parties. I’m not talking about seats. But even if it was slightly higher. Imagine the hypocrisy of a 52:48 victory for Independence being followed up with them going full steam with the drastic and sudden split you suggest Surely the last 7 years have shown you that things would not have been that simple unless it was somethi by like a 70:30 vote. Which it wouldn’t have been There are some questionable assertions in there as well. In fact - almost all of them. The implication that the day after the vote Scotland denies access to military bases. A nonsense. That they basically stop building ships. I know you didn’t say that but super progressive Scotland isn’t likely to build a significant navy (an assumption on my part of course). The idea that an Independent Scotland would quickly and easily be given entry to the EU. Not so fast. You can’t have it both ways. You rightly point of significance elsewhere but miss one of the big ones - Spain and Catalonia. Spain would be hostile to a Scotland joining the EU. Again - both of these above points suggest you haven’t been paying close enough attention over the last seven years. Same with talk of unification of Ireland. Post Brexit Northern Ireland should be a reminder at how complicated that situation is. Something else you seem to have missed is the makeup of the SNP. Did you see how close Kate Forbes got to winning the leadership. And she is far from a left wing progressive. If we are entertaining speculation about a post independence Scotland I can suggest a far more likely scenario than some of yours - the SNP splits, dramatically, and ceases to exist in the same form. The voters won’t thank them for independence with a nice long stint in government. That’s not how election have ever worked. But also the party of very very conflicting ideologies (outside of nationalism and unification) will see no reason to stick together. And that’s not even getting to the corruption that appears to have been going on beneath the surface Who knows how votes for things like gender recognition will go when the party doesn’t need to stick together for the sake of a United front on delivering independence. And this was all based on “if” she had got them the referendum and “if” they had won. She didn’t and they didn’t so it really isn’t relevant. And the new guy appears much more divisive internally. There is a reason Scottish politics isn’t discussed on a forum made up of people mostly from the south of England. It actually doesn’t impact us at this moment in time and we don’t fully understand it. I’m not claiming to fully understand but I thought I’d present some counter points that were not mentioned in your post. Because your post contains a great many assumptions that I’d say are - debatable
Isn't that the whole reason for the existence of this thread? Almost everything is debatable so long as we do not resort to sarcastic, belittling put-downs, which I think demeans both the writer as well as the other person on the other side of a discusión more so than insults.
That's fine Ian, I didn't expect you to agree with me, as it was just my opinion. I disagree with nearly everything you said in your reply as I think you are massively overplaying the importance of Scottish politics and most of it was speculation and what ifs. How history will look at this period is also irrelevant to what actually happens next and at most it'll be seen as an interesting sideshow to UK politics as a whole.
With regards to who the history books will focus on for the early part of the 21st century - I’d expect mainly those in power of the U.K. as a whole rather than the opposition or Scotland. Blair - squandering goodwill via Iraq and then fumbling his handover Cameron - his abject weakness allowing Brexit to happen and then running away afterwards Johnson - his delivery of Brexit and mismanagement of covid along with all the scandals As to any not in real power worth mentioning I’d expect maybe Nick Clegg will warrant a mention as a case study in how you blow your support to smithereens by compromising on one of your key pledges without getting anything tangible in return. And as a result allowing room for both full fledged unchecked austerity and the above mentioned Brexit manoeuvres from Cameron I wonder if it would be overstating things to suggest that had clegg stood firm on tuition fees OR for actually electoral reform rather than a referendum on a half baked option that was never going to work then we wouldn’t even know what the word “Brexit” means Likely oversimplifying things but seems like a pretty major factor. The evaporation of the Lib Dems meant the Tory’s were free to appeal to the right (even more so when corbyn was a factor)
If this is you saying my reply to Ian was sarcastic and belittling then that wasn’t really the intention. Most likely a product of replying far too early in the morning Although I read / interpreted his message as far to definitive which is why my challenge likely seems irritable and exasperated. They are a lot of “would have” statements. Some of which were wild and far from certain at all. The sort of comments straight out of the wildest dreams of Sturgeon herself and not considering nuances. But it is a typed message on an Internet forum so things can get lost in that medium. Or such a firm view is necessary to provoke response. Either could be true and it is why it isn’t really the best medium for these things
Glad to see Rishi Sunak being investigated for a conflict of interest over the childcare agency debacle. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65301099 It won’t come to anything though.
