Ukraine counter offensive

[Justin Passing]

to be fair
most will be at best tutting under there breath with most thinking compared to past fiascos its in general its off marginal concern
some will think [or try to suggest ]her world is collapsing around her now these are all valid thoughts but compared to what has gone on in recent years the accusers should at least be embarrassed at having no shame as i am sure a lot off the complainers have matched or exceeded to far exceeded what she may or may not have misrepresented as the exact situation

Yes, she/they snookered herself by the party policy of "no more personal taxes".
Expenses I couldn't care less about.
I think you're right, nobody much else will apart from the tories.


WHat has she actually done?
WIkipedia says
"Early into her tenure, she established the National Wealth Fund, scrapped certain winter fuel payments, cancelled several infrastructure projects, and announced numerous public sector pay rises. She presented her first budget in October 2024, where she introduced the largest tax rises at a budget since March 1993 which is forecast to set the tax burden to its highest level in recorded history."

Not exactly Trumpian rate of work, is it?

 

[DiyNutJob]

You seem to be talking in riddles. Could you please put a coherent few sentences together to explain what you mean?

There is no riddle. Ukraine did it, so what? Russia did it, so what? US did it, so what? UK did it, so what? The last time the whole thing blew up. It was in the news for a week or two. Then nothing happened. If it blows up again, what difference does it make?

 

[transam]

There is no riddle. Ukraine did it, so what? Russia did it, so what? US did it, so what? UK did it, so what? The last time the whole thing blew up. It was in the news for a week or two. Then nothing happened. If it blows up again, what difference does it make?

Eh

Still
Peddeling the Russians passing through narrative / waffle / nonsense / baloney ??

Yes exactly

 

[fixitflav]

Are we talking 0.01% of people on benefits,

I doubt anybody has the exact figure, but if you seriously believe it's not a problem you're in a minority. And I can't put a figure on that either.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

All this talk from numerous defence 'experts' and politicians over recent years about less troops being required because 'modern warfare won't require boots on the ground.'

It didn't seem to be the strategically correct approach to me.

And now here we are ...

 

[denso13]

Musk says soldiers aren't required, including pilots, all aircraft will be drones, all remotely controlled. Trump supports him on this.

DoGE are looking at military spending as well, Bit rich to complain other countries aren't contributing enough when America doesn't meet his own targets which they are looking to cut further.

 

[DiyNutJob]

It didn't seem to be the strategically correct approach to me.

That's because you are not looking at it strategically. Is the west under military threat? No, even if it had no troops, it is still under no threat. The problem is what happened to the money saved? In america, at least, the money has gone into private hands. In europe, some of the money has gone into social welfare. A lot of it has gone into environmental scams, such as EVs and solar panels for cloud infested britain, etc.

 

[fillyboy]

Relax lads, it's all under control.

 

[DiyNutJob]

I would support this ^^^^ guy to invade russia 150%. If he wins, we will all get free oil, gas, food for a few hundred years. How do I vote for it?

 

[MNW67]

There is massive schadenfreude again over on the Telegraph comments section. The other day they were cock-a-hoop because Trump was making a peace deal and sticking it to us in Europe. Now they are wetting their knickers because any peace deal will need enforcing with European troops including UK troops. What do these people actually want?

 

[Brigadier]

There is massive schadenfreude again over on the Telegraph comments section. The other day they were cock-a-hoop because Trump was making a peace deal and sticking it to us in Europe. Now they are wetting their knickers because any peace deal will need enforcing with European troops including UK troops. What do these people actually want?

Whatever the opposite (of what is happening / likely).

So that they can write outraged tripe about it, and get their readers all enraged

 

[JohnD]

That's because you are not looking at it strategically. Is the west under military threat? No, even if it had no troops, it is still under no threat.

 

[DiyNutJob]

View attachment 373338

The talks are about a deal to keep kursk. You are not getting your analogy right.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

That's because you are not looking at it strategically. Is the west under military threat? No, even if it had no troops, it is still under no threat. The problem is what happened to the money saved? In america, at least, the money has gone into private hands. In europe, some of the money has gone into social welfare. A lot of it has gone into environmental scams, such as EVs and solar panels for cloud infested britain, etc.

Wind yer neck in mate ...

 

[JohnD]

The talks are about a deal to keep kursk. You are not getting your analogy right.

The talks are about allowing the invasion of Czechoslovskia, followed by the invasion of Poland.

Sorry, I mean allowing the invasion of Ukraine, followed by....

You'll be telling us next that Ukraine is a far-away country, of which we know little.