Potential Fuel Price Rise?

[Dryce]

But most crucially... with a certain self-proclaimed 'pacifist' politican getting nearly a third of the votes in the most recent GE... the British public clearly lost the appetite for any of the above anyway.

'clearly' - based on those numbers?

That's an interesting extrapolation. Reminiscent of the sort that a politician on the losing side in a by-election would use to conclude they had really won.

 

[Dryce]

There can be little doubt that Maggie was on her way out back then , so deeply unpopular was she due to the millions of unemployed, her foisting of the dreaded poll tax on Scotland, and just her grating voice .

The poll tax in Scotland came a long time after later.

The characteristics of her voice aren't relevant.

The Labour party was in pieces.

The leader of the Labour Party at the time was Michael Foot.

As aI said the narrative makes it simple - Falkand Islands saved the PM. You've augmented that with the poll tax which wasn't a factor at that point.

But on reflection the chances are that Michael Foot was going to lose no matter what. That's a less atractive narrative for some - more boring - but also places responsibility on politicians other than the PM - who has to be ogre'ised by some at all costs - and making the Falklands pivotal makes it about war rather than the Labour party.

 

[219]

The poll tax in Scotland came a long time after later.

The characteristics of her voice aren't relevant.

The Labour party was in pieces.

The leader of the Labour Party at the time was Michael Foot.

As aI said the narrative makes it simple - Falkand Islands saved the PM. You've augmented that with the poll tax which wasn't a factor at that point.

But on reflection the chances are that Michael Foot was going to lose no matter what. That's a less atractive narrative for some - more boring - but also places responsibility on politicians other than the PM - who has to be ogre'ised by some at all costs - and making the Falklands pivotal makes it about war rather than the Labour party.

The Tory party published their green paper proposing the poll tax in 1981 , so unpopular was it that it was a further 8 years before it was introduced.

The Falklands conflict happened in spring 1982 , so the poll tax , along with her policies of selling off state owned industries resulting in high unemployment most certainly were factors by then , and it is widely acknowledged that she was in real danger of not being re elected were it not for the ‘rallying round’ effect of the conflict. That overbearing voice certainly did grate on so very many people and undoubtedly put off many voters .

I am no supporter of Labour , but it has been shown before that unpopular policies and inflexible stands can bring about an adverse reaction from the electorate ; just as Edward Heath found when he tried to take on the miners unions , resulting in the three day week and electricity being turned off every other day , something I remember all too well .

The Tories are still remembered in Scotland for the decimation of our mining , steel and shipbuilding industries, and the phrase ‘Maggie Thatcher , milk snatcher’ still resounds in the memories of a generation after she stopped free school milk . She was anything but popular, and people have long memories.

 

[markjay]

'clearly' - based on those numbers?

That's an interesting extrapolation. Reminiscent of the sort that a politician on the losing side in a by-election would use to conclude they had really won.

Major long-term strategical decisions require a resounding majority to succeed.

Brexit, is one such decision, and look where we are now, 3 years later, our political system in meltdown and we are still trying to make it happen having passed it with a meagre 51.9% majority.

For Britain to make the decision to invest heavily in the manufacture of advanced weaponry, and recruiting and training a signification army to deploy worldwide, at the expense of investment in other areas (foreign aid, social welfare, public sector and public services, infrastructure, health and education, etc etc), and potentially recoup our costs by selling more weapons to our allies, will require agreement by a significant majority of voters.

Any attempt to pass anything like that based on a majority won by a whisker will see a re-enactment of the Brexit saga.

So 30%, plus whatever opposition there may be from other-party voters, to my mind that's a blocking bloc that will block (pardon the grammar...) any ideology of Britain restoring its former glory among the nations.

So... we seized one ship... but what can we do in response to the Iranian seizing one of ours? Hunt said it was 'unacceptable' and that there will be 'serious consequences'. Does he have a mandate from the British people to take it any further than that? This is 2019, the public mood is not what it was back in 1939.

 

[219]

Major long-term strategical decisions require a resounding majority to succeed.

Brexit, is one such decision, and look where we are now, 3 years later, our political system in meltdown and we are still trying to make it happen having passed it with a meagre 51.9% majority.

For Britain to make the decision to invest heavily in the manufacture of advanced weaponry, and recruiting and training a signification army to deploy worldwide, at the expense of investment in other areas (foreign aid, social welfare, public sector and public services, infrastructure, health and education, etc etc), and potentially recoup our costs by selling more weapons to our allies, will require agreement by a significant majority of voters.

Any attempt to pass anything like that based on a majority won by a whisker will see a re-enactment of the Brexit saga.

So 30%, plus whatever opposition there may be from other-party voters, to my mind that's a blocking bloc that will block (pardon the grammar...) any ideology of Britain restoring its former glory among the nations.

So... we seized one ship... but what can we do in response to the Iranian seizing one of ours? Hunt said it was 'unacceptable' and that there will be 'serious consequences'. Does he have a mandate from the British people to take it any further than that? This is 2019, the public mood is not what it was back in 1939.

Even back in 1982 , there might not have been an overwhelming British mood to go to war over The Falklands ; I was on a working trip in Austria when it happened , and I remember the almost universal reaction was - The Falklands - where's that ?

Even Gibraltar , although still an overseas territory , like the Falklands , would probably not evoke as huge a reaction , as would an attack on the shores of the UK .

However , I rather think that , as with Kuwait , the impact of the current situation on our economy , and for most people , what it costs us to fill our tanks , will be the biggest factor .

 

[grober]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Dryce]

and people have long memories.

Not always objective or accurate and quite often selective.

(And I'm just as guilty I guess.)

 

[Dryce]

Even back in 1982 , there might not have been an overwhelming British mood to go to war over The Falklands ; I was on a working trip in Austria when it happened , and I remember the almost universal reaction was - The Falklands - where's that ?

Back in 1982 I don't think anybody outside of the RN actually figured the country could do anything.

It was rather astonishing how it all seemed to gather momentum over several days and there were ships heading south. Meanwhile Newsnight got its sandboard out and started telling us why retaking the FI would be nigh on impossible because we'd need to have an 8:1 numbers advantage.

and I remember the almost universal reaction was - The Falklands - where's that

Giant messup by the Argentines on that one. If they'd just been patient for a few more years and been friendly and respectful to the islanders it would have fallen in their laps.

 

[Steveml63]

Hi,
Hunt can huff and puff at Iran - but without support from USA, Saudi, UAE, Oman and other allies in the region - there is little that the UK can do that will frighten Iran into releasing the captured vessel.
It could get very messy in this region quite quickly - if mistakes are made!
Cheers
Steve

 

[Dryce]

Major long-term strategical decisions require a resounding majority to succeed.

I suspect firm leadership and a cohesive parliament where both sides of the house knuckle down to get a resolution are what are actually needed.

Neither of those are remotely apparent in Westminster these days.

Brexit, is one such decision, and look where we are now, 3 years later, our political system in meltdown and we are still trying to make it happen having passed it with a meagre 51.9% majority.

I think history will eventually tell the tale of split parties and an incoherent opposition.

 

[markjay]

Back in 1982 I don't think anybody outside of the RN actually figured the country could do anything.

It was rather astonishing how it all seemed to gather momentum over several days and there were ships heading south. Meanwhile Newsnight got its sandboard out and started telling us why retaking the FI would be nigh on impossible because we'd need to have an 8:1 numbers advantage.




Giant messup by the Argentines on that one. If they'd just been patient for a few more years and been friendly and respectful to the islanders it would have fallen in their laps.

A few years back I heard Lord Bramall talk about his experience during the Falkland war.

According to his account when the RN suggested to Mrs Thatcher that they could engage militarily with the Argentinian forces on the island, it came as complete surprise because no one in government envisioned at the time that we had the capability to do so.

 

[219]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I thought Stena Line were Swedish, or European at least ? , are British ports now ports of convenience?

 

[markjay]

I thought Stena Line were Swedish, or European at least ? , are British ports now ports of convenience?

A friend who works in the oil industry explaind that the Stena Imperio was sailing under a British flag, owned by the British subsidiary of a Swedish company, and had no British nationals onboard.

In essence the UK could just write if off and let the insurers pick up the tab, but that would mean losing face (because of the British flag).

 

[219]

A few years back I heard Lord Bramall talk about his experience during the Falkland war.

According to his account when the RN suggested to Mrs Thatcher that they could engage militarily with the Argentinian forces on the island, it came as complete surprise because in government envisioned at the time that military action was even a possibility.

I know my BIL went there with the Royal Engineers , so British Army played a part ; I remember the sinking of the General Belgrano , and one of our ships being hit by an Exocet missile , and that poor chap , Simon Weston being so terribly burned , but full credit and admiration to him for bouncing back ; I also remember the QE2 being requisitioned as a troop transport, and Britannia as a hospital ship ; but my outstanding memory is of the squadron of Vulcan bombers being sent to destroy the airfield there , and the meticulous calculations re fuel consumption and logistics of so many aircraft acting as tankers , so enabling the one bomber to reach its target , and for all to get back .

Regardless of opinion , a fantastic technical achievement.

 

[markjay]

Lord Bramall also claimed that the General Belgrano was heading towards the exclusion zone rather than trying to escape as some later suggested, and he seemed sincere when he spoke of the tragic loss of life of their (the Argentinians) "young men".

 

[grober]

The Stena Impero is owned by Swedish company Stena Bulk, and operated by Northern Marine Management [a Stena subsidiary] based in Glasgow hence the UK flag. According to reports there are 23 seafarers on board of Indian, Russian, Latvian and Filipino nationality but no UK Nationals.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[grober]

Gibraltar releases Iranian oil tanker

 

[190]

Gibraltar releases Iranian oil tanker

Assuming it doesn't head for Syria then I think they did right. We should not be a lackey for Trump.

 

[Bellow]

Assuming it doesn't head for Syria then I think they did right. We should not be a lackey for Trump.

Netanyahu is more than willing though.....

Israel denies entry to outspoken Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib

 

[markjay]

Assuming it doesn't head for Syria then I think they did right. We should not be a lackey for Trump.

By complete coincidence we have suddenly decided to accept Iranian reassurances that the oil was not destined to Syria, and release their ship, just a few weeks after they seized our ship.

And, I predict that, by complete coincidence again, the Iranians will spontaneously and unrelated to the above, shortly release the British ship they seized.

Isn't it wonderful how these things just sort themselves out.....?