Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Salisbury Fox

Member
  • Posts

    221
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Salisbury Fox's Achievements

Midfield General

Midfield General (7/14)

  • Fanatic Fox
  • Dedicated
  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Very Popular

Recent Badges

164

Reputation

  1. Not sure I understand this as there were people trying to cross the channel decades before Brexit. Just looked up that the Sangatte ‘jungle’ camp opened in 1999. All that seems to have changed is the method of entry.
  2. I appreciate that you may be trying to look at this objectively, but my point is that the police officer will have to justify his use of force based upon the threat he felt there was. We could never really understand that threat from a couple of short clips, especially given I don’t believe we know yet why they approached one of the individuals in the first place which is a factor in itself. Other factors to consider will include that the officers were armed (I can’t imagine there are many circumstances that an armed police officer is attacked in training that doesn’t result in an attempt to take the weapon), the speed of the attack, unknown number of assailants (the video shows how many but did the police know at the time given they were being attacked from behind at the start), injuries to fellow officers, what was being said e.g. I’m going to kill you etc.
  3. Technically it doesn’t, but it also doesn’t say you can’t either as it has to be a reasonable use of force in the circumstances. He therefore has to justify his use of force which some seem too eager to condemn or defend him based upon watching a short clip and applying their own biases.
  4. It seems they are restricted to using them near the Kharkiv region.
  5. You can only negotiate if both sides do so in good faith, but Russia continues to show no signs of doing so: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-26-2024 You are right that that Taiwan is a priority for the US, however the outcome in Ukraine is extremely relevant to deterring action there.
  6. He doesn’t need a cult of personality. You can’t have missed the large numbers who have had mysterious accidents from tall buildings.
  7. According to Lavrov Ukraine is already using western weapons to strike inside Ukraine. Another red line crossed then
  8. Perhaps Israel is finally getting Iran back for the Argentina embassy attack in 1992. I do generally agree though that this sort of action should be avoided but I won’t be shedding any tears for those involved in terror attacks.
  9. It wouldn’t, most European armed forces have based their capabilities upon heavy US support. For example our own air defence capability has been reduced on the basis that we would have air superiority provided predominantly by the US. It would take many years to grow these capabilities.
  10. I hope so, but pressures in the Pacific may see the US pivot naturally meaning Europe needs to build a credible defence for themselves.
  11. Apologies, I wasn’t going to respond again but any failure to respond to an attack on a NATO member, even a small one like Estonia, would result in the end of the organisation. I do share your the scepticism about a Trump administration wanting to though.
×
×
  • Create New...