ISTM to be quite surreal (and frightening) that a thread about our Beloved Leader, King Bozzie Of The Mad Hair, is discussing the possible use of nuclear weapons...
ISTM to be quite surreal (and frightening) that a thread about our Beloved Leader, King Bozzie Of The Mad Hair, is discussing the possible use of nuclear weapons...
In other words, codes. Like the system the US uses.
No, I think what @betjemaniac is getting at is that there is no functional difference between a submarine authenticating an order to launch a nuclear weapon, and a submarine authenticating an order to take up such and such a position and go silent, or to intercept shipping at X location, or ...
And that really is all I'm going to say further on this. Everything above is open source if you know where to look (for avoidance of doubt before the Ship worries about the Official Secrets Act).
In other words, codes. Like the system the US uses.
No, I think what @betjemaniac is getting at is that there is no functional difference between a submarine authenticating an order to launch a nuclear weapon, and a submarine authenticating an order to take up such and such a position and go silent, or to intercept shipping at X location, or ...
Well, I suppose now we’ll never know, since betjemaniac has decided to run silent.
I suppose all this gen about GPS casts some light on why the British Government is so desperate to acquire ots own satellite system, independent of the USA and Galileo, that it has bought a bankrupt American company against the advice of its own Civil Service.
An opportunity for the current British Government to at least put on a show of proving to Northern Ireland how seriously it takes NI's membership of the Union, would be for the PM to offer an appropriate acknowledgement and apology of the Ballymurphy Massacre.
Not that it would be construed as a sincere action, of course. But foolish of the British government to pass up on an easy opportunity to create an impression it gives a shit for the people of Northern Ireland.
Interesting watching the leaders of the Unionist parties vacillating between demanding but not quite demanding a proper governmental response to Ballymurphy. On the one hand, their own prejudices prevent them entirely going so far as to say the British Security Forces used too much force against unarmed Catholic civilians. But on the other hand, they know that if the Government shrug this off as just another one of those Irish problem-things that's more convenient to pretend happens 'somewhere else', they, too, will suffer from the same negligent attitude exemplified by No. 10 Downing Street. Some day even the Unionists and the Loyalists will get the message: You Don't Matter To Us!
An opportunity for the current British Government to at least put on a show of proving to Northern Ireland how seriously it takes NI's membership of the Union, would be for the PM to offer an appropriate acknowledgement and apology of the Ballymurphy Massacre.
Not that it would be construed as a sincere action, of course. But foolish of the British government to pass up on an easy opportunity to create an impression it gives a shit for the people of Northern Ireland.
Interesting watching the leaders of the Unionist parties vacillating between demanding but not quite demanding a proper governmental response to Ballymurphy. On the one hand, their own prejudices prevent them entirely going so far as to say the British Security Forces used too much force against unarmed Catholic civilians. But on the other hand, they know that if the Government shrug this off as just another one of those Irish problem-things that's more convenient to pretend happens 'somewhere else', they, too, will suffer from the same negligent attitude exemplified by No. 10 Downing Street. Some day even the Unionists and the Loyalists will get the message: You Don't Matter To Us!
Yes, this - but it would involve Bozzie actually doing some work...
... trident-equipped submarines carry sealed orders from the Prime Minister, giving instructions (possibly) in the event of complete destruction of the UK ...
I suspect the current incumbent might manage that without having to resort to the deployment of nuclear weapons.
... trident-equipped submarines carry sealed orders from the Prime Minister, giving instructions (possibly) in the event of complete destruction of the UK ...
I suspect the current incumbent might manage that without having to resort to the deployment of nuclear weapons.
So long as Radio 4 is still broadcasting the nukes stay put.
I remember herd immunity being discussed, but it was swiftly withdrawn when the Imperial stats shocked everyone. Then it was straightforward denial, no, never happened, guv.
Why not accept that they're both lying? Priti Patel says "herd immunity wasn't government policy" - therefore we know it was. Dom Cummings says "herd immunity was government policy" - therefore we know it wasn't.
The only conclusion is that in the first few months of the pandemic when there was a chance to get on top of things and prevent many of the 127000 deaths, and counting, the government had no defined policy with different parts of government doing mutually contradictory things while Cummings went for an eye test and Boris wrote a book he needed to pay off debts caused by his own philandering.
I suspect the confusion is partly to do with a technical term being used as a shorthand.
Vaccination is a herd immunity strategy, which we are pursuing with broad political and popular support right now.
What we are really asking is: did the government not lock down fast because they thought letting the disease spread and riding out the peak was the best strategy (not at that point knowing when or if a vaccine would be available), or did they believe what they had - hands, space, face , SERCO t&t etc - would contain the spread well enough and then turn out to be wrong ?
Iirc, the time line was such that the cabinet were set on letting the virus rip, on the basis that few of their supporters would die. When it was pointed out by Ferguson et al that the death toll would be north of five hundred thousand mainly elderly house owning Tories, they decided to lockdown instead, but only after Dido Harding had enjoyed the Cheltenham festival.
Iirc, the time line was such that the cabinet were set on letting the virus rip, on the basis that few of their supporters would die.
Yes, we had Johnson's speech in February:
"there is a risk that new diseases such as coronavirus will trigger a panic and a desire for market segregation that go beyond what is medically rational to the point of doing real and unnecessary economic damage, then at that moment humanity needs some government somewhere that is willing at least to make the case powerfully for freedom of exchange, some country ready to take off its Clark Kent spectacles and leap into the phone booth and emerge with its cloak flowing as the supercharged champion, "
Or Vallance at the beginning of March (emphasis mine):
"“Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease and we reduce the transmission, at the same time we protect those who are most vulnerable to it. Those are the key things we need to do.”"
Taken at face value, the strategy was evidently one of where they thought they could avoid a shutdown by balancing the rate at which people caught COVID (broaden the peak and not suppress it completely), and eventually achieve herd mentality by having a large percentage of the population catch it. This also accords with the way in which measures were rolled out in March and April, and the involvement of the nudge unit, they assumed they could micro manage the spread of the virus to achieve their ends.
Given vaccines normally take a decade to develop - that might not have been insane given the state of knowledge at the time. What angers me, is not that initial plan, but how late it changed given what was happening on the continent.
The late lock downs later in the year were much more difficult to justify.
Given vaccines normally take a decade to develop - that might not have been insane given the state of knowledge at the time. What angers me, is not that initial plan, but how late it changed given what was happening on the continent.
The late lock downs later in the year were much more difficult to justify.
I apologise for linking to this again but here's what this looked like when I ran the numbers with a very simple model:
Iirc, the time line was such that the cabinet were set on letting the virus rip, on the basis that few of their supporters would die. When it was pointed out by Ferguson et al that the death toll would be north of five hundred thousand mainly elderly house owning Tories, they decided to lockdown instead, but only after Dido Harding had enjoyed the Cheltenham festival.
Given vaccines normally take a decade to develop - that might not have been insane given the state of knowledge at the time. What angers me, is not that initial plan, but how late it changed given what was happening on the continent.
The late lock downs later in the year were much more difficult to justify.
The situation across the winter was terrible, and is precisely why I don't give them the benefit of the doubt over the earlier period because I think it exposed both their reasoning and underlying assumptions.
In any case, the UK first locked down on the 23rd of March. I stopped going into the office on the 10th. By the following week my primary client - a multinational - were going for an orderly shutdown of all their offices based on what they were seeing in Asia. The government has greater sources of information than either of us, the choice was primarily ideological one, as signalled by both Johnson's speech and the manner in which the initial engagement was conducted (remember the disparaging comments about the Italians -- this was a government and PM addicted to exceptionalism and a 'one weird trick' view of policy creation).
"Did the UK have a herd immunity strategy? YES, it was always the default. We had no other plan. The idea of suppressing the virus via lockdown etc was made up on the hop in late March when it became clear the NHS would be overwhelmed."
The conclusion is that this isn't a government that can do long term thinking and that if you want to survive the next pandemic, then you'd be better off if they weren't in charge.
Let’s just close the borders permanently, that way the next pandemic won’t even get here in the first place.
Alternatively we could have a rational government that doesn't create barriers to travel and trade for no reason but does take decisive action when it's needed.
That really is not asking a lot. Although, irrefutably too much for 'Boris.'
I’m sure we can find somewhere. Isn’t stopping pandemics the only thing that matters? Surely throwing up a few big warehouses in Kent is a small price to pay?
I’m sure we can find somewhere. Isn’t stopping pandemics the only thing that matters? Surely throwing up a few big warehouses in Kent is a small price to pay?
Alternatively we could have a rational government that doesn't create barriers to travel and trade for no reason but does take decisive action when it's needed.
That really is not asking a lot. Although, irrefutably too much for 'Boris.'
In other news, apparently ABdePJ has secretly married his bidie-in at Westminster Cathedral.
I expect the intention is further distraction from his lies, corruption and incompetence, but if it was a Roman Catholic ceremony, how will he wriggle out of it when he finds someone else? Don't they rather frown on divorce?
I'm surprised that the Catholic church would marry anyone who'd been validly married with very extenuating circumstances - and being PM would not fall into that category.
Comments
I don't know, seems understandable...
No, I think what @betjemaniac is getting at is that there is no functional difference between a submarine authenticating an order to launch a nuclear weapon, and a submarine authenticating an order to take up such and such a position and go silent, or to intercept shipping at X location, or ...
Better hanged for a sheep than a lamb...
(not official ShipTM policy)
Bozzie the Madhaired would just love to chuck a small missile (in a limited and specific manner) at Macronia.
Or anyone else who obstructs Global Britain's progress towards World Domination.
Crazy, disorganised, oddly hilarious.
Sadly right wing English voters seem to love all three characteristics.
Not that it would be construed as a sincere action, of course. But foolish of the British government to pass up on an easy opportunity to create an impression it gives a shit for the people of Northern Ireland.
Interesting watching the leaders of the Unionist parties vacillating between demanding but not quite demanding a proper governmental response to Ballymurphy. On the one hand, their own prejudices prevent them entirely going so far as to say the British Security Forces used too much force against unarmed Catholic civilians. But on the other hand, they know that if the Government shrug this off as just another one of those Irish problem-things that's more convenient to pretend happens 'somewhere else', they, too, will suffer from the same negligent attitude exemplified by No. 10 Downing Street. Some day even the Unionists and the Loyalists will get the message: You Don't Matter To Us!
I don't write for Newsthump, but, clearly, Great Minds think alike!
Yes, this - but it would involve Bozzie actually doing some work...
It made more sense once I read on and saw he was apologising for the sins of the state and not
for anything he'd done personally.
No.
So long as Radio 4 is still broadcasting the nukes stay put.
According to the news on the radio at one, Priti Patel has denied Cummings accusation...
I am so bored of having to decide which amoral liar to believe...
The only conclusion is that in the first few months of the pandemic when there was a chance to get on top of things and prevent many of the 127000 deaths, and counting, the government had no defined policy with different parts of government doing mutually contradictory things while Cummings went for an eye test and Boris wrote a book he needed to pay off debts caused by his own philandering.
Vaccination is a herd immunity strategy, which we are pursuing with broad political and popular support right now.
What we are really asking is: did the government not lock down fast because they thought letting the disease spread and riding out the peak was the best strategy (not at that point knowing when or if a vaccine would be available), or did they believe what they had - hands, space, face , SERCO t&t etc - would contain the spread well enough and then turn out to be wrong ?
/mild satire, but also true.
Yes, we had Johnson's speech in February:
"there is a risk that new diseases such as coronavirus will trigger a panic and a desire for market segregation that go beyond what is medically rational to the point of doing real and unnecessary economic damage, then at that moment humanity needs some government somewhere that is willing at least to make the case powerfully for freedom of exchange, some country ready to take off its Clark Kent spectacles and leap into the phone booth and emerge with its cloak flowing as the supercharged champion, "
Or Vallance at the beginning of March (emphasis mine):
"“Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease and we reduce the transmission, at the same time we protect those who are most vulnerable to it. Those are the key things we need to do.”"
Taken at face value, the strategy was evidently one of where they thought they could avoid a shutdown by balancing the rate at which people caught COVID (broaden the peak and not suppress it completely), and eventually achieve herd mentality by having a large percentage of the population catch it. This also accords with the way in which measures were rolled out in March and April, and the involvement of the nudge unit, they assumed they could micro manage the spread of the virus to achieve their ends.
The late lock downs later in the year were much more difficult to justify.
I apologise for linking to this again but here's what this looked like when I ran the numbers with a very simple model:
http://alienfromzog.blogspot.com/2021/02/covid-19-and-how-johnsons-government.html
I share your anger.
AFZ
You forgot to include Carrie Symonds' baby shower at Chequers two days before Boris Johnson announced the lockdown -link to Private Eye on Twitter from June 2020, and because John Crace in the Guardian is worth reading here's the link to his column on the anniversary of the first lockdown. saying pretty much what you've just said.
The situation across the winter was terrible, and is precisely why I don't give them the benefit of the doubt over the earlier period because I think it exposed both their reasoning and underlying assumptions.
In any case, the UK first locked down on the 23rd of March. I stopped going into the office on the 10th. By the following week my primary client - a multinational - were going for an orderly shutdown of all their offices based on what they were seeing in Asia. The government has greater sources of information than either of us, the choice was primarily ideological one, as signalled by both Johnson's speech and the manner in which the initial engagement was conducted (remember the disparaging comments about the Italians -- this was a government and PM addicted to exceptionalism and a 'one weird trick' view of policy creation).
The Telegraph's health editor has a thread on twitter that is illuminating in this context: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1396899870921957383.html
"Did the UK have a herd immunity strategy? YES, it was always the default. We had no other plan. The idea of suppressing the virus via lockdown etc was made up on the hop in late March when it became clear the NHS would be overwhelmed."
The conclusion is that this isn't a government that can do long term thinking and that if you want to survive the next pandemic, then you'd be better off if they weren't in charge.
Yes, because that was certainly a reasonable and balanced summary of the position of posters here.
Alternatively we could have a rational government that doesn't create barriers to travel and trade for no reason but does take decisive action when it's needed.
That really is not asking a lot. Although, irrefutably too much for 'Boris.'
AFZ
Nah, just quarantine all incoming goods (in freezers if necessary) for a fortnight before onward transport.
Alternatively we could have a rational government that doesn't create barriers to travel and trade for no reason but does take decisive action when it's needed.
That really is not asking a lot. Although, irrefutably too much for 'Boris.'
AFZ
I expect the intention is further distraction from his lies, corruption and incompetence, but if it was a Roman Catholic ceremony, how will he wriggle out of it when he finds someone else? Don't they rather frown on divorce?
He won’t care next time. Keeping promises is not his strong point.