Davis Resigns

Bring Southgate in!!

But I like him!!!  I don't want to have to hate him!

It would be a different kind of negotiation then?  I mean I know defence has been spoken about during the current EU/UK discussions, but it hasn't seemed to be the focus.

Let me ask, and you probably know much more about this than I, do you see Britain being able to sustain/obtain 1st Tier status? 

Just from my knowledge: currently the aim is to have one operational carrier (conventionally fuelled)  with 20 (ish) F-35s. Perhaps flexing up to a more substantial number. To me that is damned impressive. It will be quality. There are questions about support fleets etc.

But do you think the US could demand much more?

Defense funding is not a UK-EU negotiation issue. The nature of continued cooperation is while the EU is moving towards merging militaries & with intel cooperation on the line.

However, proper funding by nato nations has vocally been at issue from the US, and there has been movement.

There’s a lot of talk of using the money not going to the EU to properly fund NHS and close a large funding gap in defense. The current and several former defense ministers have been vocal on the subject. PM I believe announced recently a plan to shift pensions & such out of the defense budget without cutting the defense allocation. Which is of course an accounting game, but doesn’t mean it won’t work in the screwy way governments do business.

Obviously the US pressure on defense spending has been more directed at the Continent. Germany & France just announced they would increase spending, of course without conceding that they’d done so in response to pressure.

Germany makes more sense as the US has recently indicated it’ll evaluate shifting the massive number of facilities & personnel we have in Germany. That’s tough as we have a ton invested and do need the major airhead and hospital facilities we have there. But on the other hand, post Cold War, they’re better repositioned.

I’ll save you my trying to explain the challenges of moving stuff around or where they might be better positioned. Strategically it should happen, but it should have started 20 years ago, and we have a lot of investment tied up in what we got now.

Bunch of stuff you probably don’t care much about...

Point being, we should expect Trump to say something that lends support to elements demanding the funding gap at MoD be filled. Words about strength of the alliance, need of a dependable partner, language the seems to go in hand with a trade partnership... and then also pressuring the continent, questioning the role of NATO minus the Soviets and if it isn’t willing to fund the capabilities necessary in a partnership.

All that’s really a side show... but it’s a minor way in which the PMs hands get tied and support for a coalition of others (with trade deal in balance) gets signaled.

In answer to your broader question... tier 1 status is a reference to quality more than quantity. Quantity is presumed to be proportional to population & gdp. Stepping down from tier 1 status means the UK is sitting it out if anything happens in Asia. Like China starts something or Australia gets attacked, the UK isn’t coming, cause it can’t. And that also means it has no diplomatic voice in those places and its economic interests will become second class.

So yes, I certainly do believe the UK can and must be a 1st tier military power as a predecessor to domestic spending choices. One of those things in a very real way provides for the other. One carrier is probably fine. That’s not really the gap.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Murdered by words.

Merely trying to explain how President Trump operates for those who don't understand. It has nothing to do with a cult of personality or however else you want to mislabel it. The president is an alpha male who, above anything else, commands and demands respect. You don't have to agree with him. You can think he's 100% wrong. But if you disrespect him? Then that's it, relationship over. The UK has disrespected him. So they must do something to change that. A new PM would be a good first step in repairing the damage. Or just wait 2.5 or 6.5 years until there's a new US president and try again, and in the meantime go it alone.

Hopefully the UK will have a new PM soon who will represent the British people and do what's best for them - not do the bidding of EU bureaucrats.

Someone throwing out insults and platitudes is hardly "murder by words". People constantly underestimate President Trump. Case in point...

I would be astounded if he personally met any rebels or had anywhere near the level of understanding you guys seem to give him credit for.

Ah yes, that dolt Trump. He doesn't understand anything!

Underestimate him at your own peril. You wouldn't be the first. The media and coastal elites have done it for 3+ years and they STILL don't understand it.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

Murdered by words.

Trump is only going to be in the UK for something like a day and a half and most of that will be sleeping and meeting the Queen. I would be astounded if he personally met any rebels or had anywhere near the level of understanding you guys seem to give him credit for. 

I am willing to consider the option that apart from Trump, the kind of deals you guys are talking about could be brewing, but I'd be surprised.  Given that the negotiations with the EU have been almost nonexistent from the sheer incompetence of the current government, I can't believe that something completely different (competent) has been happening with the US in secret. 
I guess we'll see.

Bolton already started it off on his Pompeo style prepping the field trip. There’s considerable talk if Trump will meet rebels. Given the weekend moves out of Chequers that potentially shut down a US trade deal before it can happen, I’d think there is definite intent to crash that plan if it takes the PM with it or not. I’d say it’s a certainty that other people on the trip will meet with rebels. I don’t know if Trump will or not, but I suspect so.

Presidents and PMs don’t really run countries and they don’t really negotiate. They have get to know you meetings, express concerns that also get expressed staff to staff, and show up at the end with a couple minor things to hammer out and a photo op of their signatures.

Whatever you think about the president, there are some people around him who are not morons, and at the end of the day he’s a pragmatic businessman.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, does that mean May's government is about to fall?

I honestly doubt it.

I think she’s asserted herself thinking she can weather resignations and survive a leadership fight - if she wins a leadership challenge, another can’t be called for a year. And I think those who would wish to be a Tory PM don’t want the wheel while Brexit is being settled. That’s the commentary I’ve seen anyway.

However, I don’t think she’s taken seriously enough the possibility of no confidence in the govt.

All that aside, I think her plan will collapse in the coming weeks while she remains in the job to take blame for whatever results - cause no matter what it is, most people will disapprove.

Interesting times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's rather like watching a train wreck, in slomo.

But I like him!!!  I don't want to have to hate him!

What I like about him is he dresses the part.  He looks more "statesman" than the people already in office.  Plus, he seems to know how to select people who can work together, and he's good at managing them.  He should be brought in.  It's not really completely a joke.

What I like about him is he dresses the part.  He looks more "statesman" than the people already in office.  Plus, he seems to know how to select people who can work together, and he's good at managing them.  He should be brought in.  It's not really completely a joke.

Yup, he’s obviously very talented.  But I hope he stays away from politics!

Yup, he’s obviously very talented.  But I hope he stays away from politics!

He seems a bit busy at the moment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He seems a bit busy at the moment.

Should be free as of next week.  Final is Sunday, right?

Whatever you think about the president, there are some people around him who are not morons, and at the end of the day he’s a pragmatic businessman.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's a lot less people around him who aren't morons than there should be.  He's certainly left too many vacancies in the state department open . 

Trump was not a successful businessman ever.  He started off with a pot of money and then went bankrupt.  For a while, he made some money off being an entertainer.  Most of his business deals have probably been more about money laundering than actual business. 

You should listen to the Embedded podcast where they interview the producers of "The Apprentice".  When they first met Trump, they were surprised to find him as a bankrupt faker.  For the sake of TV entertainment, they made it seem like he was an actual businessman.  America actually believed it and now they are mortified.

There's a lot less people around him who aren't morons than there should be.  He's certainly left too many vacancies in the state department open . 

Trump was not a successful businessman ever.  He started off with a pot of money and then went bankrupt.  For a while, he made some money off being an entertainer.  Most of his business deals have probably been more about money laundering than actual business. 

You should listen to the Embedded podcast where they interview the producers of "The Apprentice".  When they first met Trump, they were surprised to find him as a bankrupt faker.  For the sake of TV entertainment, they made it seem like he was an actual businessman.  America actually believed it and now they are mortified.

You can’t fill what the senate won’t confirm, and the opposition have refused to confirm laundry lists of completely non controversial nominees just on the point of being obstructionist. I think they’re also generally happier with the civil servants forced to hold the interim role.

The thing about money laundering is you get out less than you put in. So, if a deal ever were about laundering, he’d have had to make a great pile first.

A few real estate development projects going belly up out of many is not failure. It’s more par for the course. He hasn’t gone completely bankrupt before. That’ll happen when you chase high risk high reward deals. But overall objectively he has pretty well turned about 200m into probable 1.5-2b. It’s just a silly denial of math to think he hasn’t been wildly successful.

If that makes him good rather than just lucky, I can’t say. I think he’s a crappy negotiator. Just throwing your weight around to get what you want doesn’t make you a good negotiator. And that’s his history in business deals.

None of that though has anything to do with being a pragmatic businessman. Anyone who understands a getting to a bottom line so they can make payroll or cover bills eventually understands the need to be pragmatic. There can be no doubt that’s Trump. I’m not sure he supported any republican positions before he decided he was running. The democrats once a long while ago asked him to run on their side. But once he was facing a republican primary he suddenly cared about the 2nd amendment and let the federalist society make a list for judicial appointments. It’s laughable really, except people I know are getting judicial appointments right now & that’s pretty cool.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can’t fill what the senate won’t confirm, and the opposition have refused to confirm laundry lists of completely non controversial nominees just on the point of being obstructionist. I think they’re also generally happier with the civil servants forced to hold the interim role.

It's a bit more complicated than that.  I love it when you say something with such surety that it almost seems like a fact, until the  does just a bit of research.  The story is complicated, but "just on the point of being obstructionist" seems to be a bit far from the facts.

The thing about money laundering is you get out less than you put in. So, if a deal ever were about laundering, he’d have had to make a great pile first.

It helps if there are Russians around with great piles of money to start off with.  Then plenty can be lost, but what's left is legitimnate enough to be "clean".  Mueller's about to teach us how this works. 

What I like about him is he dresses the part.  He looks more "statesman" than the people already in office.  Plus, he seems to know how to select people who can work together, and he's good at managing them.  He should be brought in.  It's not really completely a joke.

I like his calm demeanour.   

It's a bit more complicated than that.  I love it when you say something with such surety that it almost seems like a fact, until the  does just a bit of research.  The story is complicated, but "just on the point of being obstructionist" seems to be a bit far from the facts.
It helps if there are Russians around with great piles of money to start off with.  Then plenty can be lost, but what's left is legitimnate enough to be "clean".  Mueller's about to teach us how this works.

The Russians didn’t come along as a topic till he was well into billionaire status. Don’t get me wrong, I think he keeps his finances quiet like Michael Dell & others, and I think he far over inflated his wealth based on the intellectual property value of his brand name, but he objectively started off with a couple hundred million and has incontrovertibly turned that into well beyond a billion without needing to take money from the Russians. The tax returns that are out, and a great deal of financial information that’s public record makes that quite clear.

Again, that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s especially good at business versus just lucky and able to throw his weight around. And it doesn’t mean he didn’t pay bribes to unions to get projects done in NYC or similar crimes that are pretty much the standard necessity of doing business for developers in a lot of places.

This seems to be the story on nominations: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/mar/16/donald-trump/why-trump-appointments-have-lagged-behind-other-pr/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk