Lloyds Banking Share Discussion Threads

[maxk] 17/7/2019 08:26

Alp

I used to think the lesser spotted Milliband seemed like a reasonable choice (not for me) but for the bloke in the street.

However, he took the Soros shilling, so all bets are off.

[alphorn] 17/7/2019 08:24

Read that Redwood article - condense it to two points:

- The US would like to export and sell more domestically produced arms. America first.
- It is not $ spend that is important but quality of spend. Producing mammoth targets aka aircraft carriers with no planes meets the spend criteria but could not be more opposite to having anything worthwhile.

Redwood came off the boil some time ago.

[xxxxxy] 17/7/2019 08:19

Independence and military co-operation

By JOHNREDWOOD | Published: JULY 17, 2019

The main continental EU countries are out to strengthen their military collaboration. Over the years they have worked away at joint exercises, common weapons procurement, common standards, exchange of personnel, unified commands and shared missions. There are now military interventions undertaken by EU directed troops or naval vessels. The UK has been particularly concerned about being pulled into a European army, owing to the legal constraints that operate on a member state once it has accepted the competence of the EU in any given area. Some think the UK has already consented to more collaboration than is desirable and is now entrapped. Others accept that as we leave the EU we cannot be forced to co-operate or to participate against our will.

The UK has been keener on joint working through NATO, including our US allies. NATO too has a long tradition of common action, shared defence procurement programmes, common standards and procedures, exchanges of personnel and unified commands for given tasks, exercises and missions. It is clear under the NATO charter that whilst we and the other members sign a mutual pledge to defend each other, a NATO member is free to determine their own commitment to any resulting NATO action. NATO is a coalition of the willing, that makes up missions from members in the light of the needs based on consent.

Under President Trump the USA would like the continental countries to make a bigger contribution to NATO defence. The USA points out that European members of NATO rely on US engagement and the common security guarantee for their ultimate protection. Surely, the US asks, the Europeans could at least meet the minimum funding requirement for NATO membership so they are making a bit better contribution to the collective defence?

The UK does meet the minimum requirement, and does possess military capability to join NATO engagements around the world, contributing naval vessels, aircraft and mobile soldiers. UK forces have worked hard to ensure they can co-operate with US forces, as well as undertaking training and exercises with European forces.

Setting our armed services in the context of collaboration and assistance with others does bring a downside. It might mean that we lack particular capabilities where we rely on others, which would limit our own ability to undertake a mission for ourselves. The UK needs to ensure it has sufficient capability to go to the assistance of our own territories or allies, and to defend ourselves at home, whoever the aggressor and whatever our principal allies might think.

[alphorn] 17/7/2019 08:19

Max - can't be worse than the current crop, on all sides of the house.

[maxk] 17/7/2019 08:17

Bliar mk11

[alphorn] 17/7/2019 08:15

Lots more of the story still to run.

Never believe a politician and neither Boris nor Hunt are as white as snow. Actions, once elected, could turn on a sixpence.

Nothing bullish about any of the options.

[bargainbob] 17/7/2019 08:05

Tony Blair back , what you smoking :-)

[buywell3] 17/7/2019 07:09

Thing is Brexit now looks like being extended by the new EU leader



= more uncertainty

Boris MUST get England out by Oct 31st or Labour will get back in when Tony Bliar makes a return as the leader.

[maxk] 17/7/2019 00:03

I dont know either graham.

Whilst we know where we stand with Hunt.

I'm not at all sure of Boris.

I wish it were different.

[grahamite2] 17/7/2019 00:01

Key words

hag
C U Next Tuesday
treachery
hideous
poisonous
communist
treason
creature
scorched earth
abomination

But one person thinks she was successful. He says, "She had one task – to derail Brexit – and she succeeded spectacularly."

[grahamite2] 16/7/2019 23:54

I don't know.

In 1910, the government had the authority of a second election victory to support their proposals - but they only won with a much reduced majority, so that could be viewed two ways. In 1949 it was a government that had already been in power some years and so with no fresh mandate.

So I don't think there is a precise precedent. All you can say for sure is that the crown has protected the people against vested interests on a number of occasions.

[maxk] 16/7/2019 23:45

Nothing to do with age.

More to do with, is she up for blowing out a rogue parliament?

[grahamite2] 16/7/2019 23:36

As to your question - are you referring to her age? Didn't stop her standing up in a barge for hours not that long ago. This is one tough lady, from a generation for which duty meant something.

[grahamite2] 16/7/2019 23:35

Max - have you looked at "In the dying embers of her premiership, Theresa May is still doing her best to harm Conservatism"? The comments are hilarious - this woman is NOT popular with the Conservative faithful!

[maxk] 16/7/2019 23:27

Perhaps graham, but would she push the button in this case?

[grahamite2] 16/7/2019 23:26

Max, look back to 1910/11 and 1948/49. The Monarchy hates being drawn into politics but when necessary it steps up to the plate.

[grahamite2] 16/7/2019 23:24

300 years ago it was King v Parliament, now it is Parliament v people. It's been that way for some years now but has lately become intense.

If this present Parliament were completely sidelined that could only be a good thing, both morally right and very popular.

[maxk] 16/7/2019 23:24

afaik, Boris would need the Queens assent to shut down parliament.

Would it be forthcoming?

[cheshire pete] 16/7/2019 23:12

Shock horror at Boris's plan to shut down parliament. Why the surprise....parliament is part of the problem not part of the solution. They have by their actions over 3 years shown contempt for the referendum result and the electorate. Boris is right to by-pass parliament. They've had their chance and blown it. Boris has 100% support from me...and if I think that way be sure that many more do as well.

[diku] 16/7/2019 22:36

Watch lunar eclipse now if you have clear skies...

[xxxxxy] 16/7/2019 22:14

Bob George 16 Jul 2019 10:10PM

Its sickening that after the majority of the public had voted to leave an arch Europhile like Hammond became Chancellor.

The Treasury's figures are clearly politically motivated when the person leading it supports Major's proposal to take Boris to court to challenge suspending Parliament and also refuses to commit to not voting down his own Government in the event we wont sign a surrender agreement.

May will rightly go down as the worst PM in history and I see no reason why Hammond should be thought of any better.

Good luck to Boris in getting us cleanly out of the self-serving elites latest attempt to create an authoritarian empire.

[diku] 16/7/2019 21:57

All these buy backs and shares in issue stubbornly above 70bln...I think it has actually creeped up...buy back with 1 hand and issue new shares with 2 hands...

[alphorn] 16/7/2019 21:46

"remainers, they're only interested in money".

So says cheshire posting from the Convent for Distressed Gentlefolk.

ROFLMAO

[mr.elbee] 16/7/2019 20:53

is there a special factory that creates these non female females?

Rosa Klebb springs to mind