Awol

Have austerity measures ever failed? The experiment in Europe is going great guns thus far. Without the accompanying relief of currency devaluation in individual countries (an option they do not have inside the euro) it won't work.

Even if they voted for it Madrid wouldn't wear it. As the article states there is no constitutional mechanism for total secession of the Spanish regions and any unilateral declaration would likely be met with force - the army is loyal to Madrid. Even without violence Madrid could also can block any attempt by an "independent" Catalonia to join the EU which leaves them where, exactly? The real issue is the destruction of the Spanish economy, the need for a 100 billion euro bailout for the Spanish banking sector and more broadly a bailout for the entire Spanish economy. That is being fiercely resisted because it effectively hands economic governance of Europe's 4th largest economy to Brussels and Frankfurt, something the Spanish people would rightly not accept. What they need to do (imho) is fully crystallise the loses to bank balance sheets by accurately marking to market the devaluation in property values. This would purge the financial system of bad debt and see most Spanish banks go under with the accompanying loses to investors and shareholders, but if the UK experience since 2007 has any lesson to learn from it is the folly of propping up insolvent banks at the expense of the real economy. This wouldn't be allowed of course because the effects would cascade across all European and then International banking systems, so instead the 'plebs' across the west will continue getting shafted to prop up a failed and insolvent financial system.. ..Aaand breathe...

full article here: Evil Labour Interesting that the "we really are in deep shit" penny seems to be dropping across Westminster, but then Balls' is slipperier than an eel in a bucket of weasel grease. Best to assume anything promised by any of the 3 main parties is a self seeking lie designed solely to get/keep their noses in the trough.

I laughed.

Interesting news headline on Oman Radio yesterday: "Iranian President Ahmadinejad has called for a new world order that is not run by Western powers in league with the Devil.."

Is it because the armband is black?

A Pakistani politician has put a bounty of $100,000 on the film makers lives and no action has been taken against him. Responding to insult with violence is accepted in some parts of the Muslim world and it shouldn't be. It gets better, he appealed to his "Taliban brothers and Al Qaeda brothers" to assist him. He also said that if the US will hand the film maker over to Pakistan the Minister is willing to kill him with his own hands.. Mental

They also walked to the north pole together, but not odd at all, more adventurous and motivated.. BTW she rowed the Atlantic 50/50 with him, amazing woman! More importantly, he's a good local MP.

No, they're not all like that. But quite a lot of them are, especially the ones who have most power and influence. When I meet ones who aren't, and who have achieved high standing in the tory party without being like that, I'm pleasantly surprised - but still surprised. You'd like my mate. Youngest Major in the Royal Army Medical Corps with a great career in front of him. Resigned on principle when we decided to invaded Iraq in 2003, but has fought against the parsimonious system on behalf of veterans support groups as a parliamentary candidate, and since then as an MP. Expect he'll lose his seat next time (unless his constituents appreciate his role fighting against HS2 for them) due to his PM being a throbber, but he's not the only good guy. Tobias Ellwood is another 'good' Tory, an officer in my Battalion while I was serving. I don't doubt that there are plenty more of them too, sadly they are led by fucksticks.

Well said Mr Without Leave. He epitomises eveything the public revile about Dave's Tory Government. We're all in it together? Bollocks. 'They' look down on 'Us'. We are the plebs. Well that's what pisses me off. A good friend of mine from his pre-political days is the Tory MP for North Warwickshire. A more honourable, patriotic and decent man you couldn't wish to meet. Men like Andrew Mitchell make everyone think Tories are all the same arrogant fuckwits who believe they are entitled to rule, and they're not all like that. The fact this has happened in the same week two female officers laid down their lives in Manchester just makes me want to vomit/punch the granny out of this tool even more.

Andrew Mitchell. What a w**ker. I think his qualified apology (denying 'effin 3 times at a rozzer) just makes things worse. He should resign, his patronising, sneering and arrogant attitude is indefensible and represents everything people rightly hate about the Tories. Utter knob head.

I'd argue a couple of those points, not in a major way, but... France probably has more capability than the UK - certainly in areas like carriers and Maritime aircraft. To me their capability is more "in tune" with the modern world in many respects. As Ads has said, the CDG does give them a maritime fast air component that we are now lacking, but (assuming they are not pre-sold before they hit the water) the QE and POW carriers with whatever version of the F-35 we get will provide the RN with the best carrier capability outside the USN. Assuming bollitickers don't object to the slight diversion I'm interested to know how and why you think the French force structure is more "in tune" with the modern world? I don't think that's an accurate or fair characterisation of the relationship (particularly between the NSA and Cheltenham), but unfortunately this isn't really the place to explore that further. You'll know more about this subject but my general understanding is that there is very little we can't get - I've also heard that the source code issues for F-35 have been resolved. It's not, IMO, an issue of selling our national conscience, more that our national interests frequently overlap. When that happens then putting our shoulder to their wheel to help achieve jointly held objectives is fair enough, but when they don't we shouldn't - see Iraq part II. Proven reliability when push comes to shove. We both agree that the SDSR was a disaster predicated purely on saving cash. Decisions to develop new strategic partnerships in that climate should be viewed with extreme caution, imo. Not that greater cooperation with the French is a bad thing, on the contrary. However it is not and can never be a replacement for our combat proven existing arrangements. As a nation we can choose to prioritise the funds to do whatever we feel is necessary to protect the national interest, but that should be based on a process of identifying what we want to do, figuring out what we need to do it, then allocating funds accordingly. Funnily enough exactly what Liam Fox told me would happen before the last election - *laughs bitterly* Of course they act in their own national interest, as should we. I'm not looking at this through starry, idealistic eyes, but as what can best guarantee the security of the UK. For me that means choosing the US over Europe every time.

Wiki Which in itself comes from the EDA which is I think as close as it gets to the horses mouth. Them being the 2010 figures, which one would imagine given the nature of the beast are the latest figures available Yours btw claim to be 2011 figures from some Swedish Peace Loving Pinko Organisation ;-) Statistics eh? Either way, there is not a lot in it between the spend of UK and France on defence and they are the only capable military powers in Europe. Should the euro federalists get their way then the UK and France will form the core of a united European military capability. The trouble with Europe is the serious military muscle to defend it has been provided by the USA since at least the 1960's. Our biggest concern should be that the US decides European defence is not worth its tax dollars, not whether we should tell the Americans to go whistle.

We maintain greater and more varied capabilities than our European neighbours excluding France, and they spend virtually the same amount we do. No they don't UK €43bil 2.56% GDP France €39bil 2.01% GDP Germany €33bil 1.34% GDP Italy €21bil 1.4% GDP and downwards thereafter Where are your figures from? Wiki has: UK: USD$62.7 billion and 2.6% of GDP France: USD$62.5 billion and 2.3% of GDP German is in a totally different strategic, economic and political situation to the UK. You're comparing apples and elephants.

Hilarious

We maintain greater and more varied capabilities than our European neighbours excluding France, and they spend virtually the same amount we do. The metrics being used to try and define a pattern to casualties are nonsensical. The UK is operating in by far the most dangerous area of Afghan (Helmand Province) and has different operational procedures to other countries, i.e. our troops embed with ANA soldiers down to the section and platoon level to conduct mentoring in combat. No other country does this which means our guys are at greater risk, and additionally the task taken on by the UK military has been the largest and most dangerous given the actual numbers committed to achieve the mission. That depends. We remain the most militarily effective ally of the US, in return we get access to the US intelligence gathering capability (which is unparalleled) and the latest in military technology. Whatever political bitching and derision is directed at the "special relationship", the reality of it is evident in our national security posture - and the benefits we enjoy due to that relationship. The idea of chucking that away in order to throw our lot in with a gaggle of totally unreliable EU countries is beyond crazy when view through the national interest of the UK. That changes of course if one thinks maintaining the UK as an independent social and political entity isn't a good thing in and of itself.

Since WW2 European countries other than the UK have fought in or against: China, North Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Algeria, Libya, Iraq, Cyprus, Congo, Chad, Ivory Coast, Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo and Afghanistan - there are probably many more that I've forgotten. Most of those involved the French and others were mainly the Dutch and Belgians with the Germans involved in a few too. Neither have the Scandinavians been shy when it comes to having a ruck overseas and likewise the Poles. Either way the supposition (if there is one) of a warmongering Britain sitting off a conflict averse continent is very wide of the mark.

The state they are in right now it's akin to boarding the Titanic. If Germany is prepared to foot the financial bill in return for political dominance then the southern countries can slowly recover, but I'm less than convinced that German voters will swallow that. The relevance to this thread is what course the government and the opposition intend to take?

Not to be out done by les Americans, a satirical French magazine has published fresh Mohamed cartoons today - here. I think this is turning into a freedom of speech issue now for many in the West but we may well be in for another round of hi-jinks after Friday prayers..

Okay, but for future reference I prefer 'eccentric' to loon.. The fact that Barraso (with German support) has now openly said that he intends to pursue a fully Federalised Europe, we are going to be faced with a choice: The end of the UK as an Independent State or exiting the EU before it fully assumes Statehood. The idea that we can be in the EU but not part of a Federal State (which is allegedly the stance the coalition seem to be steering for) is a non-starter in reality for all kinds of reasons. Being as Barrosos' timeline for this is the 2014 European elections, and any treaty change requires a referendum in the UK this subject is going to become quite mainstream, quite soon.

Any chance you could stop slinging mud at unnamed posters and actually have a reasoned debate? Not only is it contrary to the spirit of the site but it cheapens any argument you may have. No problem, I've been told many times - in less than diplomatic terms - by Drat and others of a pro-EU persuasion on here that the EU doesn't intend to create a Federal Superstate. I've tried to rebut that with evidence from the EU itself, foreign media and the architects of the EU project that this is exactly what is intended and always has been I would be very happy to have that debate in a mature and grown up fashion that didn't end in being called a little Englander / bigot, etc. ….It's like the UKIP and BNP manifesto are being quoted verbatim here….Maybe if the inward insular looking Little Englander mentality was removed and understood that industry and everything that goes with it is multi-national things could move forward. More here I won’t bother linking anymore posts but you get the idea. The constant references to the BNP are an obvious attempt to conflate “EU sceptic” with “racist” and the little Englander stuff is there in black and white. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, but to reiterate I'm more than happy to have the real discussion without the nonsense.

Something that they have been doing since they turned the 15 to 25. Blitzkrieg without bullets. I have it on the good authority of many VT'ers that this is hysterical nonsense. Therefore you must be one of those bigoted little Englander types who thinks that anyone without a title should live in Downton Abbey as a slave of the rich. Oh, and you're probably a racist too.. ..Or maybe what EU sceptics have been saying for years was actually a thoughtful and reasoned argument, not the steaming pile of horse poo it was caricatured as? The end state of ever closer European integration was more than a little obvious to anyone who cared to look at the evidence, it is only the UK establishment and mainstream media who pretend otherwise.

Would that not be due to a lisp? Lithp, surely?

Death Match? Boris, easily.

Peter, I'm not pretending anything. This has been pretty much the only topic of conversation with the locals (almost my entire work and social circle) since it kicked off. What is abundantly clear to me is that it really is the religious aspect above all else that has motivated the unchecked fury we've seen around the Muslim world. It's a difficult psychology for us to understand, but we really need to understand. One quote from coffee earlier today that struck home was this: "Life is cheap in the Arab world, those who die are with God and in a better place. But don't under any circumstances insult the Prophet. He is the most perfect example of a human being and Muslims will never accept it". I'm not trying to pull a fast one or paint a false picture. It really is about the religious insult above all else and there is absolutely no reasoning with it - and believe me I've been trying to.