Alistair

Refugee status becomes temporary in asylum shake-up Adults and accompanied children claiming asylum will only receive refugee status for 30 months under the changes.

Abysmal, immoral, cruel, small hearted, tiny minded, ineffective, undemocratic, and just generally utterly indecent. What a bitter godforesaken disappointment these people are.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

This is why getting into Warhammer is good(?) - there’s always something else you want to add to your pile of shame AND your consumerism is propping up the British economy. It’s win-win(?)

Starmer is an expert in finding ways to not have his cake and not eat it

I somewhat understand the rational argument for, like, “this war has started and we’re in no position to undo it, so we have to protect our citizens/bases/allies”, but, I mean, for fuck’s sake, we’re gonna be actively aiding the belligerents in this war

“We cannot say that the United States’ actions are against international law, but we condemn Iran’s retaliatory actions as against international law,” is neither a coherent nor a compelling position.

Outrageous and inept that we are associating ourselves with this. It will never be enough for the Tories and Reform ['you had to be pushed to do it', 'why are we just doing defensive stuff we should be right there side by side'] and it will disgust and horrify progressives.

Could you maybe resign already?

Industry estimates, and the fact that the missiles only need servicing every 5 or so years. The fact you’ve raised access to positioning systems shows you have no idea how the system works so I will be leaving this here (it utilises a combination of gyroscopic positioning and star shots)

Starmer's ability to find the exact sweetspot which pisses off everyone is extraordinary. He's a savant.

(2 also leaves open the option of greater collaboration with the French in future)

2) obviously as current estimates are between 5 and 10 years for which it could be kept functioning. Significantly better than leaving Europe to be extorted by Putin

The bastards keep making cool minis I want to paint

"GW'S NEXT SINISTER PLOT TO STICK THEIR FINGERS IN YOUR WALLET" and it's just me smiling pleasantly for fifteen seconds before saying, "They will make toys you would like," before hitting the jarring Hammond organ and a big-ass crash of lightning and thunder.

Nah, they’d just make some joke about Brits having access to all those ingredients and choosing to eat flavourless slop or something

And yet here in the UK one of our prominent parties is calling for us to disarm

(And yes, I’m old now, not keen on this)

I do feel this - studying at Durham pre 2008 it always felt like the hedonism of studenthood and the “Durham bubble” existed as insulation against a world that felt like it was stalling

I've also been struck by this. The Trump regime is normalising the decapitation of governments it dislikes by assassinating or abducting their leaders. There are good reasons why states have tended not to make this a norm.

I’d love Khan as PM, would be a massive loss to London though

Photo of assembly guide for a kroot mini. In English they are a "Kroot Cold-Blood". In French they are a "Sang-froid Kroot"

<explosions and screaming erupt around them>

BRITISH KROOT: Imperial Guard! Kill them all. No prisoners.
FRENCH KROOT <dragging on a Gauloise and swirling half a glass of wine>: un moment, mon frere. There is, 'ow you say? No rush.

Just noticed that somehow I have got imperial fist yellow on the jumper I put on this morning despite not doing any painting in it at any point

I agree. I find people such as the person I was arguing with (and have now blocked for condescension) incredibly dangerous as they don’t seem to understand the absolute basics of nuclear deterrence and seem to assume that you maintain an arsenal to launch it

Wow, sorry that is so incredibly condescending. I invite you to read a lot further into nuclear deterrence and gain a basic understanding of it.

If your adversary has nuclear weapons and there is no reason for them to believe that using them may lead to a nuclear response your choice is to surrender or be destroyed.

Yes, it would be terrible, so is a war of aggression that those weapons could have prevented from occurring in the first place. Especially one in which a nuclear power can use theirs indiscriminately.

The whole point is never to launch the weapons.

To stand up a new frame without NATO providing the same capabilities in anything approaching a reasonable timeframe (and trying to bring along UK allies) is absurd

Deterrence only works if you can credibly destroy an opposing nation’s ability to operate as a state and thus requires a significant number of warheads. This increases if you believe tactical use can de-escalate as then you need both tactical and strategic capabilities (I am not swayed by that)

(And as previously noted *if* Ukraine had a credible nuclear deterrent Russia wouldn’t be in there in the first place)

(*more comfortable supporting the greens)