Off Topic Coronavirus and NOTHING to do with football thread

No investment for years obviously, and now it is coming back to bite. I somehow doubt that Thérèse Coffey is the person to get and sort this out.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...y-air-quality-defra-public-accounts-committee

 

?? Article removed as it apparently breached an embargo.

Some sort of censorship?

 

I may be late to the party, but this has me wondering about the EU.

 

It was an article on the findings of a select committee report on DEFRA. The department has people looking for second hand computors that have old operating systems on them as they have never upgraded, and now have to do 14M transactions annually on paper. Many of the systems are no longer receiving security updates, so become open to hackers. The department cannot find IT people to work on such dated equipment, so have to employ agencies at huge additional expense. The estimate is that it will take four years to upgrade the systems and cost hundreds of £M's. There was a lot more detail, this is just an outline of some of the findings.
Why hold the report back? I guess so that the department has time to muster a defence against what is a damning report, or a chance to kick it into the long grass.

 

She's a paid Russian propagandist. Of course the EU will chip in, they're next in line if Russia succeed in Ukraine.

 

Cheezuz Kryste, she's a nutter! Who da feck votes for these people in such numbers that they actually get elected? Talk about the left meeting the right!

 

MEPs seem to mostly be complete fruitloops compared to the rest of them.

 

Difficult to disagree when you remember the flag waving idiots from UKIP.

 

A statement which you do not have one iota of proof for other than that that most neutral of sources the Ukraine have declared that anyone who doesn't support their rhetoric 100% must be a Russian propagandist - and you repeat it parrot fashion on here. The next thing you will say is that I am paid by Moscow ! Fortunately there are parts of the World who don't follow this line - meaning nearly all African countries, most of Latin America, China, India and several others (most of the World in fact). Countries who have enough memory to compare Russia's actions with those of the USA in the past and wonder why different rules are being used in judging them. By all means back the Ukraine, but remember that, by the same token, we should have sent arms to Iraq, boycotted the USA, frozen their assets, declared the country a terrorist land, declared their leader a war criminal and declared that Iraq must win - that is if we had wanted to apply international law in an impartial way. Of course we did none of that.

 

Whataboutism is another Russian propaganda technique. I don't think you're paid for by Moscow, I just think you're stuck in that weird mindset that US actions = bad and Russia = good because they had a fake form of communism back in the day (which ironically destroyed all hopes for it to be replicated again in the West ever).

You're a Putin apologist, you swallow up their lies and attack anything said against him and his followers.

 

I also don't support the US actions in Iraq or Afghanistan, I don't think invading other countries and razing them to the ground is acceptable in any circumstance. You do though, if it's Russia doing it, which is where we differ.

 

'She's not paid by Moscow'



Weird that she's appearing on Russian state television and voting against all measures to help Ukraine in the EU Parliament?

 

Sorry Cologne, she's an absolute nutjob - I looked her up before I posted: groups she's in, votes she's taken. I have to agree with Toby's assessment about her. And if she's not actually paid by putin, then she's definitely one of his "useful idiots".

 

Don't try to put words into my mouth - I have never said that Russia's invasion was justified. It was wrong just as the invasion of Iraq was wrong - the main difference between the two has been in the Western reaction to both which has been glaringly different. If you are going to have international law then it needs to apply to all nations equally, which it obviously doesn't. I have said that I believe NATO expansion and barking on Russia's doorstep have been a contributory factor which provoked a response, but have also condemned that response - exactly the response which the Pope has also taken - or is he also a Putin fan in your eyes ? I am not swallowing up lies - and, to be honest I have no idea which sites I would have to use in order to actually read Russian propaganda - I read the Guardian, the Times of India and Al Jazeera (the last two because their reporting is more neutral than the BBC). Actually the West is much more open to propaganda from Selenskiy, he appears more or less everywhere.

Just to get one point straight - I have no love of Russia or any misplaced loyalty to it because of its so called Communist past. As you say it was never Communist. I've never been there and have no intention of changing that. I don't hate America but it's difficult to engage with the politics of a country which feels it has the right to interfere in the politics of every country on this planet (by divine right) and has actually invaded, bombed or tried to topple governments in over 50 countries since 1945. Actually the only president who didn't order an attack on another country over that time was Jimmy Carter. By contrast Russia is only interested in what its neighbours do.

 

She may be a nutjob Fez (I've looked up a bit on her and that appears to confirm this) but what she said on this occasion was ok. Even nutjobs say true things sometimes

 

What we do know is that Ukraine or NATO was not on the point of invading Russia, attacking civilians, which is a war crime in all international law. What sickens me is the pointless loss of life. You see video of a drone destroying a tank, and it is easy to forget that there is likely to be a crew inside. Or you see a town completely razed to the ground by shells and bombs, and there will have been injury or deaths.
Politicians can say different things to support their own leanings, but they are usually nowhere near the fighting. At least Zelenskyy stayed in town to lead his people, whereas Putin seems to be behaving like a frightened animal, that started a fight, and now wishes he didn't.

 

What propaganda from Zelenskyy? He's trying to stop his fellow Ukrainians from being murdered. Western countries are doing the bare minimum to help Ukraine, I wish they were doing more but a little help is better than nothing.

Russia has no right to invade countries that wish to join NATO, no country has attacked Russia yet you're painting them as the victims.

Russia is currently bombing Syria, meddling in African civil wars (and murdering civilians) so that's not true. 'Interested in what its neighbours do' generally translates to bombing them/invading them or installing puppet politicians. Why do you think Russia's neighbours want to join NATO? No one is forcing them to. Ask Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania or Finland if they want Russia back in charge?

All you do is criticise Ukraine, I don't remember you saying anything about the atrocities being committed by the Russian army yet so far you've:

- Called the Maidan revolution a 'coup'
- Called the Ukrainians nazis
- Accused Ukraine of selling heavy weapons on the black market
- Criticised Zelenskyy
- Claimed Russia is defending 'ethnic Russians in the Donbas'
- Blamed NATO
- Attacked me for pointing out that Clare woman is pro-Putin (and most likely paid by the Kremlin)

Show me one post where you've condemned the Russian troops torturing, beheading, raping or executing Ukrainian men, women and children?

 

The question is whether NATO is purely a defensive force and of how much it can operate independently of the the will of the USA Frenchie. NATO bombed civilians in Belgrade - and Romany convoys, schools and hospitals - my Wife's daughter in law is Serbian and was in Belgrade the whole time. The question is whether NATO just serves as a catspaw of the USA and simply serves to legitimize wars which are usefull to America. There were over 200,000 civilian deaths in Iraq, together with Al Graib and, Guantanamo - where has the international outcry been in those cases, apart from a few protest marches ? International law is a thing which has to be applied impartially or it has little validity. The main difference is that we did not see the video coverage of those events on our screens on a daily basis.

 

Certainly France would not see itself as subservient to the USA, although maybe the UK is in a different position. If Putin was worried about the expansion of NATO, his actions have had the reverse result. I decry war wherever it takes place, as apart from the obvious humanitarian disaster, the economy of war is crazy. Just think what could be done with the money that every shell or bomb costs. There are many low cost schemes that enable people to improve their lives in the poorest countries. Instead of relying on charities to fund these schemes, I would prefer to see the cost of a few bombs handed over by governments.

 

Just to answer these points singly. 1. The Maidan revolution was a coup in which far right groups were heavily involved, together with the Americans, who have been active there since 2000.
2. I have never called all Ukrainians Nazis - just sections of their national guard and army. (The Russians have a fair amount of them as well)
3. Ukraine has become the major source of black market weapons currently in circulation Worldwide and the American authorities are concerned about this.
4. I have not criticized Selenskiy other than by remarking that he is an expert in using the media. Of course he has an interest in picturing the Russians as being brutal, incompetent and demoralized and the Ukraine as being a brave nation fighting to defend the West (who he says will be next) - he can do nothing else, and he is doing it very well.
5. Russia is partly motivated by protecting ethnic Russians in the Dombass - the only thing I don't understand is that this region declared its independence much earlier but Russian recognition of it only came years later.
6. NATO is partly to blame.
7. I have no idea where the Clare woman earns her money (nor do you), but what she said on this occasion was valid.
8. I have never justified the Russian invasion - show me one post where I have done so - if you can't do this then forevever hold thy peace on this particular accusation.

My position is that I want peace and am sceptical whether this can be achieved by just saying we have to beat the Russians - this mentality can only inflame the situation even more because the more weapons the west pumps in there the more Putin can justify his war to his own people. The biggest question hangs around the Russian majority population in the Dombass - can they be protected after a possible Ukrainian victory in a country which has become much more heavily weaponised - this scenario could only lead to a civil war (a continuation of the situation between 2014 and now but worse). There has to be a referendum held in those areas which is overseen by the UN and both sides must respect the result. At some point a partition will be necessary. Also there is no way Ukraine can be in NATO - some sort of guaranteed neutrality is necessary there. Of course with guarantees as to the countries future security - something similar to what happened with Austria.