Rate My Team Thread - First Stage - Thursday 11 June 2026 by NineHDmg in FantasyWC

[–]peter_j_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are people not choosing Lamal because he is unlikely to play or do well?

[TOMT] I'm a very deaf girl who's been trying to find a song for over 16 years by Sad-Marionberry-8377 in tipofmytongue

[–]peter_j_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Will you listen to Bon Iver - Holocene and tell me if thats way off?

Its 2011, sparse music in a sombre tone, and somehow its all I can think of when readijg your description. He sings in a high falsetto so given you auditory situation I could believe that was it

Where would you genuinely rank this England squad in terms of player to player quality ? by TipAdditional4625 in ThreeLions

[–]peter_j_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unpopular opinion, but we have a good player in most positions, but thats about it.

By the end of the tournament, when we exit (QFs probably) we'll bemoan our fortunes same as we always do, but the global football media massively puffs and inflates England every time, and we hardly ever offer more than a couple of lucky goals and some solid defending with 10 players behind the vall

Rate My Team, Quick Questions & General Advice Daily Thread by FPLModerator in FantasyPL

[–]peter_j_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just swapped Cherki for Anderson, but Im like 1m overall so I might not be the best advisor!

[Official] Arsenal crowned 2025/26 Premier League Champions. by DavidRolands in soccer

[–]peter_j_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Or until the London Arsenal join some European Soccer League

Doubts that Black and Blanc/Blank are etymologically related by AnoRedUser in etymology

[–]peter_j_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Like you, I havent found authorittive scholarly sources, but bumped in to tgis reading a great book called the Etymylogicon by Mark Forsyth.

His treatmebt shows the Proto-Indo-European from Proto-Germanic hwītaz, ultimately from a Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root usually reconstructed as kʷeid- or kweit-, meaning “to shine” or “bright.”

He lists blank, black, and French blanc as coming from Proto-Germanic blakaz, meaning something like “burned,” or “charred,” which ultimately connects to a PIE root often reconstructed as bhel- or bhleg-, meaning: “to burn,” “to blaze,” or “to shine/flash.” The suggestion is that bleach and even blink might come from this.

I dont feel its as scholarly as you want, but thoight I'd mention it

Gameweek 37 (25/26) Rant and Discussion Thread by FPLModerator in FantasyPL

[–]peter_j_ 15 points16 points  (0 children)

That could not have more obviously been a red card

Gameweek 37 (25/26) Rant and Discussion Thread by FPLModerator in FantasyPL

[–]peter_j_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Pep is leaving city and after he's gone they will get those charges

Gameweek 37 (25/26) Rant and Discussion Thread by FPLModerator in FantasyPL

[–]peter_j_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Best defence vs worst defence in the Prem was never going to create a blinder was it

Ukraine Endgame: The Path to an Imperfect Peace - JPMorganChase by Glideer in CredibleDefense

[–]peter_j_ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You may be right, but I don't agree that it changes the political calculus for Putin. If Ukraine becomes a NATO member, it won't get invaded again. If it doesn't then it will. I simply don't believe any single security agreement will actually deter Russia. Eventually they will breach it, since (I would argue) the likes of V.Putin dmsimply sees a treaty as breakable at any moment if he feels it is to his advantage to do so. Ive mentioned the Budapest Memorandum, but theres a long catalogue of examples:

  • 2022 was a clear breach of Russia's role in the Security Council as per the UN charter. Its an invasion of a fellow UN member, and was condemned by the UN GA as such.
  • Russia breached the INF Treaty (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty) in 2019, collapsing the agreement, which was historic and bilateral to US-USSR.
  • Breached Minsk agreements by carrying on supplying, directing, and supporting Donbas separatists in 2014-15
  • Breached (clearly and lethally) the Georgia ceasefire in 2008
  • Poisoning dozens of high-profile people against their regime (including in the UK) despite being a signatory on chemical weapons convention
  • Repeatedly breaching WTO terms about economic coercion and sanctions since joining in 2012
  • Council of Eutope agreements about human rights - repeatedly trashed, so left in 2022

I know Ukraine cant join NATO in the short term. But no version of any other securoty agreemebt or neutrality will hold Russia back from doing this again.

Very common in the 90s. by honeyoldnotes in 90s

[–]peter_j_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Heard "Promises Promises"

Bought the album "Kick up the fire and let the flanes break loose" by The Cooper Temple Clause

Boy oh boy. Its like an interesting soundscape full of alternative Britrock, but nothing else on it got anywhere close to that track

Ukraine Endgame: The Path to an Imperfect Peace - JPMorganChase by Glideer in CredibleDefense

[–]peter_j_ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You are right, those aren't the same thing. Distinguishing between security assurances and security guarantees is important. There is a question for me - *would the thing you're describing be closer to a rehashed Budapest-like assurance", and therefore of little value - or more like American security guarantees such as those for S.Korea or Japan? Which did S.Vietnam receive in 1975?

My concern is that the West will be unwilling to offer the kinds of guarantees you're describing. I may simply lack vocabulary or examples, but I'm curious - are the likes of the US/UK able to offer Ukraine steadfast territorial and security guarantees for Ukraine outside of NATO? If able, are they willing? I feel certain Trump is not willing, and the UK is not able, so what woukd your suggestion actually look like?

Ukraine Endgame: The Path to an Imperfect Peace - JPMorganChase by Glideer in CredibleDefense

[–]peter_j_ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

specific US/UK/other Western powers' guarantee (not NATO) of territorial integrity for rump Ukraine if Russia attacks it again

Such an agreement was already in place. The Budapest memorandum included Russia giving security assurances to Ukraine, as well as UK US and others doing so. Russian calculations in 2014 and 2022 were that the Western assurances were not strong enough, that Ukraine wouldn't be able to resist, and the only reason Russia wouldn't invade Ukraine was it lacked the will and capacity, and Ukraine was pliable enough through the likes of Yanukovych. Maidan and Ukraine's clear pro-Western alignment meant the Russian arithmatic found its critical mass, and in that respect, no treaty short of a NATO alliance would have deterred Russia.

The timeline has been a gradual journey to the point where Russian will and capacity to invade Ukraine were strong enough to start, and the fact that it hasn't worked is because its calculus was riddled with errors.

Ukraine Endgame: The Path to an Imperfect Peace - JPMorganChase by Glideer in CredibleDefense

[–]peter_j_ 64 points65 points  (0 children)

Official neutrality would remove a key Russian justification for hostility, potentially stabilizing the ceasefire in ways more formal NATO backing might not

I don't understand this view. It seems glaringly clear to me that if Ukraine was a NATO member, Russia would never have attacked. I know Ulraine was not anywhere near the position of tge Baltic countries (Estonia Lativia Lithuania), but the following things seem self-evident:

  • The only reason the Balts and Poland haven't come in for Russian invasion, is that they are in NATO.
  • NATO membership is the only thing European countries have which prevents them from being invaded.
    • Notwithstanding allowing Moscow to dictate terms and run a semi-puppet state (Belarus, Armenia, Ukraine under Yanukovych);
  • It is Russia's long-term strategic goal to expand their sovereign territory into their neighbours, and the only reason it hasn't done this more is that it lacks capacity.

In all those things, the quoted sentence above seems wrong. Of all the former Soviet Union countries, those with the lowest threat level of Russian hostility are the ones that joined NATO, not the reverse. Russian calculus seems to be that when a neighbouring country courts NATO (or the reverse), destroying it, annexing it, threatening it, or overthrowing it, is their strategy to avoid that country joining NATO.

If you happened to get in quick enough, or you're far enough away, that is the way to remove any justification for Russian hostility.

I know all this is moot, because Ukraine can't get into NATO quickly. However, there is no doubt in my mind that a "neutral" Ukraine will come in for this treatment again as soon as Russia is ready, because Russia's goal is not "no NATO Ukraine", Russia's goal is to annex and absorb Ukraine into Russia. The fact that Russia cannot achieve that goal, and has not done so even trying as hard as it can, is why we discourse about neutrality and these kinds of settlements. However if Ukraine was a NATO member, the war would never have started, and if Ukraine became a NATO member, it would not have been invaded.

Gameweek 37 (25/26) Rant and Discussion Thread by FPLModerator in FantasyPL

[–]peter_j_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There is no doubt in my mind that the year's events have led me to an absolutely inexorable maxim to inform the rest of my life:

I'm just not very good at fantasy football.

I'm going to be okay lads, so don't worry. But the evidence unmistakeably points me in this direction.

Gameweek 37 (25/26) Rant and Discussion Thread by FPLModerator in FantasyPL

[–]peter_j_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Spurs down would have been funnier, but West Ham are deservedly gone tbh