CIA Chief Ratcliffe went to Moscow to warn the Kremlin. This time, reports say it’s not about Ukraine or Iran but threats to NATO. Even if Moscow isn’t listening, we must prepare.
“Hope is not a policy” is such a good summary. I think one of the hardest things about risk is having to make decisions before you have certainty. Knowing when the warning signs are serious enough to justify acting, especially when the threat might never materialise, is the really tricky bit.
“Hope is not policy” is very good. Unfortunately for the British an outsiders prospective is you are doomed. Failed by the suicidal social policies. Britain has been less weakened less by external threats than by domestic policy. The Putin regime simply just has to wait the British out. Who wants to man the ships? Who wants to drive the trucks? Who wants to pilot the drones? What’s the incentive? What are they fighting for exactly? If you think this doesn’t matter or play into the chess game being played, barking your dogmatic national security concerns from the top of your tallest church steeple I would look down, the fires at your feet, same as it’s been for others recently.
Trump threw Putin a grand red carpet reception while Trump and MAGA undermined Ukraine. Everyone was citing this Russia NATO risk. Trump NATO rhetoric encouraged Putin. Surprised to see it unfolding? Now Trump screwed US flexibility with his Iran strategy. Blames Biden-Ukraine for weapons inventory.
You need to ensure your audio levels are consistent, Tom. For that reason presently I would not wish to listen to dispatches on headphones whilst out and about.
How is testing guns a threat? What threat did this “rustbucket” pose? What could we reasonably and legally have done about it, apart from watch? Genuine questions.
We're about to find out what happens when someone with little left to lose, finally loses his grip on a pointless war. Russia are sniffing around Britain's sub sea cables with deep sea subs and dragging anchor across Baltic cables. The saying goes, the next war looks nothing like the next. I think if Britains 'experts' understood the evolution of warfare, we would never ever have relegated defence to such pithy funding. The next war is here, Putin is a committed tester, pushing and identifying whether we have the power and will to stand up to him. We don't and worse,we show no commitment to defence spending but I'm sure labour will push the aid commitment back up with no evidence of effectiveness, and the consequence will be a slow grinding down via infrastructural sabotage, psychological manipulation, territorial annexation, taking advantage of immigration pressure, ominous threats. We already know some of this from Alexander Dugin. Watch Transnistria and Belarus as well as the seas around baltics and Britain for what happens next.
We’re an island with a nuclear armed blue water navy and the backing of NATO. Our Government has committed an extra £5bn to drone warfare. Russia is a paper tiger losing 6,000 irreplaceable soldiers each month in Ukraine, with declining oil revenues, an airforce than can’t even win air superiority in Ukraine and a navy that has been hobbled in the Black Sea. Increased defence spending pulls funding out of important national projects like reaching net zero (which helps to grow our economy by between £2-£4 for every £1 spent according to the Climate Change Committee) and national infrastructure and social programmes which all stem the rise of the far right. If a far right government gets in we’ll be at a much higher risk of Russian interference from within the state than we currently face from a direct attack.
Given that declaring war on a NATO country would spell the end of Russia (and possibly the world), I think it’s probably more likely that Russia will increase funding, training and support terrorist organisations and other covert operations to sabotage British infrastructure and sow dissent, whilst maintaining plausible deniability. But that really points to a benefit in increasing the funding of MI5, MI6 and GCHQ rather than defence spending.
My sweet Summer child… War has an interest in you, even if you don’t have an interest in war. The U.K. is Ukraine’s #1 supporter. Its largest and closest ally is potentially unreliable, which could fracture NATO. James is absolutely right that Putin could order a full-scale mobilization. The U.K. has almost zero protection against ballistic missiles and Russia’s Northern Fleet at Murmansk has more than 60 submarines. The Royal Navy is far superior, but doesn’t have the mass. Even with the Poseidons, we could struggle to hold the G-I-UK gap. Deterrence costs peanuts compared to fighting a war. You are right that MI-6 would almost certainly know in advance. What would that get us? Perhaps six or eight weeks to prepare.
It’s not. He uses propaganda to tell Russians they are really fighting the ‘West’ rather than losing to Ukraine. As he becomes desperate, he may decide full mobilization is his path to staying in power. ‘Rolling the iron dice’ as James so eloquently put it.
In your list of defence expenditure by GDP we might be 12th but we are also the largest economy by far. It's outright spending that counts, not spending compared to roads and pensions and all the rest of it.
Dear Tom Tugendhat, please can you explain why, when a list of names in relation to Peter Theil’s secret ‘dialog’ group was published on Substack.. Your name Tom Tugendhat was on that list?
“Hope is not a policy” is such a good summary. I think one of the hardest things about risk is having to make decisions before you have certainty. Knowing when the warning signs are serious enough to justify acting, especially when the threat might never materialise, is the really tricky bit.
“Hope is not policy” is very good. Unfortunately for the British an outsiders prospective is you are doomed. Failed by the suicidal social policies. Britain has been less weakened less by external threats than by domestic policy. The Putin regime simply just has to wait the British out. Who wants to man the ships? Who wants to drive the trucks? Who wants to pilot the drones? What’s the incentive? What are they fighting for exactly? If you think this doesn’t matter or play into the chess game being played, barking your dogmatic national security concerns from the top of your tallest church steeple I would look down, the fires at your feet, same as it’s been for others recently.
Trump threw Putin a grand red carpet reception while Trump and MAGA undermined Ukraine. Everyone was citing this Russia NATO risk. Trump NATO rhetoric encouraged Putin. Surprised to see it unfolding? Now Trump screwed US flexibility with his Iran strategy. Blames Biden-Ukraine for weapons inventory.
The Tory party were eager to follow Trump’s MAGA policies when in power. How would that have helped?
You need to ensure your audio levels are consistent, Tom. For that reason presently I would not wish to listen to dispatches on headphones whilst out and about.
This almost stalemate seems never-ending. The drain on each country and their citizens is appalling.
How is testing guns a threat? What threat did this “rustbucket” pose? What could we reasonably and legally have done about it, apart from watch? Genuine questions.
We're about to find out what happens when someone with little left to lose, finally loses his grip on a pointless war. Russia are sniffing around Britain's sub sea cables with deep sea subs and dragging anchor across Baltic cables. The saying goes, the next war looks nothing like the next. I think if Britains 'experts' understood the evolution of warfare, we would never ever have relegated defence to such pithy funding. The next war is here, Putin is a committed tester, pushing and identifying whether we have the power and will to stand up to him. We don't and worse,we show no commitment to defence spending but I'm sure labour will push the aid commitment back up with no evidence of effectiveness, and the consequence will be a slow grinding down via infrastructural sabotage, psychological manipulation, territorial annexation, taking advantage of immigration pressure, ominous threats. We already know some of this from Alexander Dugin. Watch Transnistria and Belarus as well as the seas around baltics and Britain for what happens next.
Finland never disarmed under a "peace dividend" but Sweden certainly did.
We’re an island with a nuclear armed blue water navy and the backing of NATO. Our Government has committed an extra £5bn to drone warfare. Russia is a paper tiger losing 6,000 irreplaceable soldiers each month in Ukraine, with declining oil revenues, an airforce than can’t even win air superiority in Ukraine and a navy that has been hobbled in the Black Sea. Increased defence spending pulls funding out of important national projects like reaching net zero (which helps to grow our economy by between £2-£4 for every £1 spent according to the Climate Change Committee) and national infrastructure and social programmes which all stem the rise of the far right. If a far right government gets in we’ll be at a much higher risk of Russian interference from within the state than we currently face from a direct attack.
Given that declaring war on a NATO country would spell the end of Russia (and possibly the world), I think it’s probably more likely that Russia will increase funding, training and support terrorist organisations and other covert operations to sabotage British infrastructure and sow dissent, whilst maintaining plausible deniability. But that really points to a benefit in increasing the funding of MI5, MI6 and GCHQ rather than defence spending.
My sweet Summer child… War has an interest in you, even if you don’t have an interest in war. The U.K. is Ukraine’s #1 supporter. Its largest and closest ally is potentially unreliable, which could fracture NATO. James is absolutely right that Putin could order a full-scale mobilization. The U.K. has almost zero protection against ballistic missiles and Russia’s Northern Fleet at Murmansk has more than 60 submarines. The Royal Navy is far superior, but doesn’t have the mass. Even with the Poseidons, we could struggle to hold the G-I-UK gap. Deterrence costs peanuts compared to fighting a war. You are right that MI-6 would almost certainly know in advance. What would that get us? Perhaps six or eight weeks to prepare.
That’s low bar for glamour you’re holding isn’t it? Pizza Hut, McDonald’s?? Where do you go for casual grits?
Bit weird youre coming from the russia should scare us angle, but also, theyre bound to lose in ukraine.
It’s not. He uses propaganda to tell Russians they are really fighting the ‘West’ rather than losing to Ukraine. As he becomes desperate, he may decide full mobilization is his path to staying in power. ‘Rolling the iron dice’ as James so eloquently put it.
In your list of defence expenditure by GDP we might be 12th but we are also the largest economy by far. It's outright spending that counts, not spending compared to roads and pensions and all the rest of it.
Dear Tom Tugendhat, please can you explain why, when a list of names in relation to Peter Theil’s secret ‘dialog’ group was published on Substack.. Your name Tom Tugendhat was on that list?
I am more than a little curious 🧐