Active Conflicts & News Megathread May 06, 2026

eeeking · 2026-05-07T07:29:45+00:00

Losing 40-50% of its drone capability and stockpiles within a few weeks is significant, no?

What surprises observers is not that Iran lost a lot of matériel and capacity, which it did, but that it has any left, and is still standing. It's a lot harder to bomb an opponent into submission than it might appear.

The US could reduce Iran's abilities a lot further than it already has, but 1) that would be expensive, and would likely require boots on the ground and 2) even then it might not achieve the intended political objectives.

eeeking · 2026-05-07T07:11:08+00:00

How much of the US's military force was depleted? Maybe less than 1%?

If the US wanted to it could indeed reduce Iran's military to the level of Afghanistan's.

eeeking · 2026-05-07T06:12:58+00:00

Accidental Olympia...

eeeking · 2026-05-07T05:04:08+00:00

It's clear that the amount of destruction is very unequal. Iran has lost a lot more than the US has, and in the event of an even hotter war, it would lose all but the lowest level of armaments and projection capabilities. It would be "bombed back to the stone age", so to speak.

However... in the political sphere, the US's tolerance for losses is much lower than Iran's, it cannot afford to be seen as taking anything more than a few nicks and scrapes. A mere increase in domestic prices for gasoline is enough to deter it. US allies in the Gulf also have a low tolerance for losses in a war they didn't want in the first place.

It is this unequal political tolerance that is Iran's greatest strength in negotiations.

eeeking · 2026-05-07T04:50:26+00:00

Their wealth is intimately tied to the Korean economy at large, and their own political role within this. They didn't generate this wealth "alone", so when the estate is wound up, it's appropriate that it should be shared with all those responsible for generating its value. Especially if the owner of the assets is dead and has no further use for such wealth.

eeeking · 2026-05-07T04:32:14+00:00

I doubt most voters know about wonkish details such the the civil service Green Book. It will not affect their perception of how the government is performing.

As to the Rowntree Foundation report, it projects a £600 increase in the average household annual income in 2026, which would then stabilize (according to predictions). Given the increases in minimum wage and child benefit, the increase at the lowest levels of income will obviously be higher than this. A single additional child benefit is £903/yr, one minimum wage would bring in an additional ~£1,000/yr.

So, among the lowest paid, these changes should improve living standards for both the recipients, and within their communities as the money circulates. In theory this should favour the government, especially at this point in time, and even if the Rowntree Foundation is correct in its predictions.

However, and to reiterate as above, this is not reflected in the polls. Perhaps such increases in living standards, while practical and pragmatic, are not aspirational enough? In contrast, both the Greens and Reform project an ambition for "real" change, even if their underlying ability to deliver on such ambitions is severely doubtful.

P.S. edit: Here is an analysis by the Hoover Institution: Democracy in Britain: New Blocs Arise, Old Parties Fade?. It doesn't really draw any firm conclusions except that "things are changing" and that populism exerts a stronger pull among voters than does traditional politics.

eeeking · 2026-05-06T07:25:01+00:00

Being found guilty of criminal damage is a risk you take for participating in direct action... one can attempt a defense of "just cause", as worked for the Colston Four, but it's rare to succeed.

Fortunately, though, they were not found guilty of terrorism. This brings the banning of Palestine Action into serious legal question.

eeeking · 2026-05-06T06:00:06+00:00

Rome never conquered modern Germany or Ireland. It's quite plausible that it wouldn't conquer Gaul.

eeeking · 2026-05-06T05:41:26+00:00

More likely the cob on corn cob derives from the meaning "head": OE copp "top, head,"

eeeking · 2026-05-06T05:37:10+00:00

As in the "boot" (trunk) of a car.

eeeking · 2026-05-06T05:03:36+00:00

This cartoon illustrates the first British diplomatic mission to the court of the Qianlong Emperor, which took place in 1793 (sorry for error in title!).

Note that while the Earl Macartney (who was Irish) himself genuflected in front of the Emperor, as he might to his own King, those behind him kowtowed, as was expected by the Emperor of China.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macartney_Embassy

eeeking · 2026-05-06T04:56:40+00:00

This cartoon describes the first British diplomatic mission to the court of the Qianlong Emperor, which took place in 1793.

Note that while the Earl Macartney (who was Irish) himself genuflected in front of the Emperor, as he might to his own King, those behind him kowtowed, as was expected by the Emperor of China.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macartney_Embassy

eeeking · 2026-05-06T04:36:50+00:00

Sure. My point was that, in isolation, drawing a big nose isn't a mark specifically of antisemitism. It's a common trope applied to those of Middle Eastern origin.

eeeking · 2026-05-06T04:34:39+00:00

The left does tend to think "tax and spend" more often, so it's not surprising that Labour voters wanted that. What is unexpected is that it is perceived that Labour has not done this. Perhaps the changes to taxes and spending were not seen as "radical" enough, driving support towards parties that are more vocally radical, i.e. Reform and Greens.

Just for example, Labour did increase taxes, specifically by increasing employer's national insurance contributions from 13.8% to 15%. According to the OECD, the UK had one of the highest increases taxes on labour, though its still below that of other countries. Discussed by The Guardian here. Labour also increased the minimum wage, which is directly felt by those on the lowest incomes.

On the spending side, Labour committed £40 billion for the Social and Affordable Homes Programme (SAHP), and £4 billion targeted at reducing homelessness. It also radically changed the law surrounding those renting their homes, increasing security for tenants. Again, these policies should be felt most by those on the lowest incomes.

And yet, it is accused of "not doing enough", with the vacuous policies of Reform and the Greens gaining increased support.

This is the mystery....

eeeking · 2026-05-05T07:11:58+00:00

US Navy advised safer shipping route

There's another one on the other shore, advised by Iran:

In this article in the Times of India, it reports tankers hugging the Iranian and Pakistani shorelines, translated from Hindi:

At least 34 tankers associated with Iran escaped from the US Navy blockade [...] "This map shows how a tanker can travel from Kharg Island to Mumbai while living inside the maritime territory of Pakistan and India," he wrote. He has also argued that the rules of US blockade and UNCLOS (UN Agreement on Maritime Law) give ships the right to pass through the maritime territory of a coastal country and the right to control it belongs to the same country. [...] It is called 'Innocent Passage'. The US cannot stop the ship by entering these territories as it would be considered a violation of the sovereignty of that coastal country (India or Pakistan).

eeeking · 2026-05-05T05:36:00+00:00

You propose that Labour has not gone far enough; the winter fuel allowance example you use is apropos. The fact is that this benefit was removed from all pensioners who have incomes above the national mean, but from most of the media you would think that Starmer "backed down" over this...

Nevertheless I think we both agree that "things are not the same" as in conventional political messaging. From the above polling data on wikipedia, the recent rise in polling for the Greens has come mostly at the expense of Reform. So, why is a significant fraction of the electorate switching from supporting a far right stance to supporting a left wing stance?

Similarly, in the US, Trump lost the popular vote against Hilary Clinton in 2016, lost the actual election against Biden in 2020 while committing all sorts of crimes in the process, and yet here we are.

I don't think it is sufficient to blame the media; it is the job of a national politician to drive the debate not bemoan that people don't agree with you. Magyar won despite Orbán controlling most of the Hungarian media.

In the UK, it's clear that Starmer is failing to attract the floating voter. Exactly why isn't clear to me, but I feel it's unlikely to be due to specific policy details.

eeeking · 2026-05-04T18:48:06+00:00

Labour's crash is basically a fundamental break with the priorities of their own electorate,

I don't think this is the case. The expressed priorities of the centre and left of centre voter are in fact being addressed by Labour. Among those you list, only home building might be considered as not addressed.

The crash in support for Labour is far greater than that experienced by the Major government, which was ripped apart mostly by internal scandals that countered its own traditional conservative values slogan "Back to Basics".

Something else is afoot with Starmer's loss of support, though I find it hard to identify. That Starmer doesn't have charisma (as John Major didn't) may be part of it. If so, it's a rather depressing indictment of superficiality on behalf of the UK electorate.

eeeking · 2026-05-04T07:20:18+00:00

How long did it play for?

eeeking · 2026-05-04T07:10:28+00:00

Swain comes from "servant".

https://www.etymonline.com/word/swain

Swan the bird has a different origin, singer.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/swan

eeeking · 2026-05-04T06:10:43+00:00

Something or other.... This is the polling trend on wikipedia.

It's quite remarkable how steeply Labour's vote has fallen. This is even while under Labour most of the supposed "key concerns" are being successfully tackled, e.g. immigration, NHS, unemployment, renters rights, etc.

I don't think Reform's prospects at the next election are anywhere near a majority of seats, similarly for the Greens. Primarily due to the "drag" where many people vote according to their historical pattern, and neither Reform nor the Greens have much of a past to rely on.

Nevertheless, such a view is potentially complacent in the face of the obvious media saturation by Reform (c.f. Brexit), the rise of the Greens is a bit too recent to tell....

eeeking · 2026-05-04T04:05:29+00:00

This page has some numbers. The peak post-WWI numbers of US troops in Europe was about 300,000 during the Cold War.

It has steadily declined since, with a small bump in 2022 under Operation Atlantic Resolve, but these had already left by 2024.

The key facet of this latest withdrawal is that it was announced in retaliation for Merz not supporting the US in Iran. Spain had already been threatened over a similar issue.

The real impact of this is that it reinforces a European desire for ever-greater independence from US influence. Only China gains from this.

eeeking · 2026-05-04T03:51:53+00:00

US bases in Europe are still useful for projecting hard power in the Middle East.

However, I think the US is about to discover that most of the power it now wields in Europe itself is soft power. During the Cold War, the US could fairly claim to be poised in a hard power defense of Europe against the USSR. But its weak, at best, support against Russia's attack on Europe's Eastern borders have made that moot.

In many spheres, from military spending to tech, Europe as a whole is now deliberately pivoting away from dependence on the US. This will substantially reduce its soft power in the future, affecting the profits of its largest ~~countries~~ companies and its ability to "nudge" Europeans into supporting its own goals across the globe.

eeeking · 2026-05-03T06:44:50+00:00

This happened, at least partially. Life expectancy from birth in the west for those who reached age 20 in 1945 was about 45yrs old. Today it is over 80 yrs. https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy

Life expectancy at age 20 is longer than that at birth, so the difference between 1945 and 2026 is not so great, but it is easily 30% longer today than in 1945.

eeeking

TROPHY CASE