I think it’s funny that the episode that very briefly mentions Irish unification was banned, but the episode that stereotyped all Irish men as drunkards and all Irish women as scolds was just fine.
I mean, one was viewed as being supportive of an ongoing terrorist campaign, a touchy subject in both Ireland and the UK, that no TV channel wanted to get involved with, and the other was viewed as a dumb cringe-inducing stereotype.
Imagine the tables were turned and an Irish or British show airing in 2001 had an episode where they appear to be supportive of al-qaeda carrying out 9/11, and another episode where they depict Americans as being fat, uneducated, pickup-driving hillbillies with tacky bleached blonde hair.
I suspect US networks wouldn’t show the first episode, but they’d show the other one, even knowing it’d elicit an eye roll and a “Christ, is that really what they think we’re like?” from the audience.
I get why they banned the one they banned (even though I wouldn’t have been okay with it at the time), I just think it’s funny because Up the Long Ladder is basically “let’s cram as many Irish stereotypes into one episode as we possibly can” and they didn’t think that it might be extremely offensive to Irish people.
EDIT: Just the very concept that Irish people would colonize another planet in order to be pig farmers is pretty offensive.
“Sooner or later this will end in agreement,” was Putin’s message, arguing that Nato was coming to realise that defeating Russia on the battlefield would be impossible.
Does Putin realize that NATO is effectively fighting Russia with both arms tied behind it’s back right now? We’re funding Ukraine (who are doing a phenomenal job, fwiw), but we’re not even giving them the top of the line hardware. If the US actually got involved, Russia would pretty much instantly lose any glimmer of air superiority they have, and Ukraine could advance all the way to Moscow under NATO air cover. Like, the only reason Russia still exists is because NATO hasn’t even tried to fight Russia on the battlefield yet.
And we’re learning that a teenager with a drone can be hilariously effective against modern weapons.
So is Russia. Except Russia is learning how to combat the kids with drones too. They’re gaining invaluable battlefield experience that NATO troops simply aren’t.
Reports vary from side to side, from showing that Russians are curb stomping Ukraine to Ukraine is holding it’s own. So, sure, NATO tossing the kid gloves to Ukraine and putting up a fight is comforting, but it isn’t the whole picture. Russia wins a war of attrition. NATO is made up of democracies and war fatigue sets in fast when it’s someone else’s war. Russia is a de facto fascist dictatorship with deep oil pockets. The only thing that turns their troops around is the head of state dying, or a massive coup. Reports of ether being imminent seem to be rather premature.
How do you feel about Russia’s deep oil pockets now that Ukraine is going after their refineries and porta? Do you think Russia can continue to advance or hold ground while also defending large swaths of the western part of Russia? Genuinely curious
They’re gaining invaluable battlefield experience that NATO troops simply aren’t.
Oh, yes they are. Ukraine is in close contact with NATO countries and sharing intel. NATO countries are also buying drones in bulk right now. And developing ones that Russia will not see until they try to pick a fight with NATO.
If the US actually got involved air superiority would be the least of our worries. The minute any major NATO nation gets properly involved, the war goes nuclear very soon after
There are people over Putin too. No ruler can rule alone and without consent, his rich oligarch buddies don’t want to cruise their yachts during nuclear winter.
Mutually assured destruction is pretty much why no one will ever actually go through with that if their target also has nukes or is protected by a country that has them. It’s one of the major reasons no country that has nukes wants to disarm.
You realize Muammar Gaddafi only died 12 years ago and Russia only invaded Ukraine two years ago? Nuclear weapon programs take at least that long to develop. Ukraine and Libya had programs (Ukraine actually had weapons) and abandoned them, much to their demise. If they kept their programs, they wouldn’t have had these problems.
The key word in my comment is “will.” That’s a prediction. You can ping me in 25 years to see if this works out. In the mean time, people are taking this prediction seriously (it isn’t only my prediction) when discussing global politics.
No worries. Libya did give up its nuclear program as well, but it was because all the countries that invaded Afghanistan in 2001 said, “do it or you’re next.”
They should have thought of that before co-signing the Budapest accords. At least two NATO countries are already involved.
The last time Russian units engaged Americans in combat they were so outmatched that the Russian chain of command disavowed their own guys and pretended not to know them. Nuclear conflagration would be a much better death by comparison.
If the nuke comes out, it won’t make an ounce of a difference who has more of them: if only each side can manage to land a small handful, everyone is equally and utterly fucked.
This principle alone is why NATO has not engaged Russia more directly.
I wonder if people forgot, or maybe gen Z and millenials never really know how bad nuclear weapons are. Even a regional nuclear exchange would probably lead to a nuclear winter and then a nuclear summer, completely fucking the climate. As long as we have them, it’s inevitable that we’ll eventually use them. Just the law of large numbers / Murphey’s law. The wars climate change will cause will make that even more likely. But hey, lets keep playing stupid games.
The better wording might be ‘British registered ship attacked by Houthi fighters, damaged and may sink’ or something. It’s very deliberately proving that the Houthi propaganda around its sinking is incorrect. That’s not copium, it’s news.
No, I’m looking at the images and thinking that it’s not sunk. Which is what the Houthis are saying it was. Which is what the article is proving false. Which, again, is news not ‘copium’.
It doesn’t necessarily need to be sinking. It could have some sections flooded and not sink anymore… But yeah it’s a bit of nitpick…specially if the boat it’s stuck and cannot be moved by itself, which is the case here and while towing it it could eventually sink if some stuff continues to break or similar.
So I looked them up with my Mastodon account to try to follow but quickly discovered that not all searches for ‘BBC’ lead to accounts related to the BBC…l.
It’s like Twitter and that manchild on top try to make the worst possible decision at any issue over and over again.
Here is another one for the 2024 Bullshit Bingo: Twitter employees sacrifice orphaned children to their dark gods. Some users consider using the site a little less for a few days.
The shocking part isn’t that they did it, or that they even admitted to it, but that there was actually an employee there in a position to actually admit anything in some capacity.
Social media major X (formerly Twitter) has admitted to taking down accounts and posts related to the ongoing farmers’ protests in India.
X user and Indian journalist Mohammed Zubair wrote on Monday that “many influential X accounts” of reporters, influencers and prominent farm unionists covering farmers’ protest in India were “suspended”.
Mandeep Punia, a journalist, told the BBC that his account and that of his news platform - Gaon Savera - have been withheld.
India’s main opposition Congress party has criticised the government for the clampdown, accusing it of trying to silence dissenting voices in a democratic country.
The protesters have been attempting to march to India’s capital, Delhi, from the neighbouring states of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.
Haryana and Uttar Pradesh states, which are ruled by the governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), have deployed a large number of police and paramilitary troops to stop the farmers from reaching Delhi.
The original article contains 513 words, the summary contains 151 words. Saved 71%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
A British-registered ship attacked in the Red Sea has been damaged but has not sunk, BBC Verify has discovered.
BBC analysis shows the attacks have continued despite the US and UK launching strikes on Houthis in Yemen.
The BBC has also obtained an image from Wednesday (shown at the top of this article) apparently of the same vessel in a similar situation, still afloat but with its stern very low in the water.
The attacks have prompted many shipping companies to stop using the critical waterway, which accounts for about 12% of global seaborne trade.
The UK government has condemned the Houthi action as “completely unacceptable” and said it and its allies reserve the right to respond appropriately.
US and British forces began carrying out air strikes on military targets across Houthi-controlled western Yemen in response last month.
The original article contains 427 words, the summary contains 138 words. Saved 68%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
bbc.co.uk
Active