A passive Prime Minister who prefers process over politics.

I couldnt resist teasing you after the pomposity of your previous comment. You take your comments seriously and I wasn't. Apologies.

And of course none (or few) of us on this thread have a clue about defence strategy so I don't take your (or my views) as in any way being a heavy weight opinion.

That can apply to Russia as well, the UK is still doing the right thing on Ukraine

I think he’s trying to use it politically in the same way he sold in the ‘coalition of the willing’ with press ops, but agree.

Don't be a child. It's a serious subject.

Really? You would immediately bomb any country that attacked a NATO member no matter what the attack consisted of?

Good we dont have such a trigger happy person in charge!

I'm not sure he's even been consistent or in what way people think he "called it" on Iran TBH..

It was obvious what was coming, and you'd have to be a political clod not to realise that due to Blair/Bush the UK population had no stomach for getting involved in another US led Middle East intervention...

There was then all the talk about the USAF not being allowed to use places like Fairford for offensive ops but that changed.

Rightly or wrongly they now able to bomb up there and they very obviously use Uk airspace...compare and contrast with the likes of Spain and some other EU/NATO nations.

Another issue is the UK PM certainly doesn't appear to be prepared to be as critical of POTUS as the likes of the German chancellor has been recently.

It's almost a case of the PM keeping his head down, anything for a quiet life.

That probably wouldn't be a 'difficult judgement call', would it?

give me strength.

Really? Even if a NATO country was attacked?

Yes, though if there's a difficult judgement call to make about whether or not to bomb a country, I'd prefer a prime minister who errs on the side of not doing so...

Well I hope and think so. But it's early days and no one will be able to judge whether it was the right or wrong call (re future relations with the US for example) for a few years yet.

Farage isn't PM?

For such an unread man, he called it right on Iran

I can't be bothered to find the tweet, but there's a US right wing commentator who's said that Mandelson being mates with the Epstein set was what qualfied him for the job.

The US relationship is, at this point, both unbelivably important and next-to-unmanageable. Against that background, appointing a suitably-connected unprincipled shit like Mandelson was a political gamble. You can say at this point that it has backfired, and that it was the wrong thing, but there's no doubt Starmer did it with his eyes open.

This is like those time wasting posts which insist that the Labour government has 'done nothing' which are simply blinkered rhetoric, show them https://whathaskeirdone.co.uk/results or https://fullfact.org/government-tracker/
and they have no answer because it's facts instead of fiction.

AI gave me this:
Nigel Farage has previously stated he has little time for reading, music, or television due to his political career, telling
The Telegraph in 2015 that he was "saving them up" for when he leaves politics. However, in a 2012 interview, he mentioned liking fiction and referenced liking the style of JM Coetzee, per The Guardian.
The Guardian +1

• Past Reading Preferences: In 2012, Farage listed Crime and Punishment, The Leopard, and Gabriel García Márquez’s Autumn of the Patriarch as favourite novels.
• Hobbies on Hold: In 2015, he noted he was too busy to read, but indicated a desire to read more and attend the theatre once his political career concluded.
• Media Consumption: In that same 2015 interview with The Telegraph, he stated, "I don't listen to music, I don't watch television, I don't read".
• The Guardian +1

I know OP, tell us what you do and we can make a big fuss about how unqualified you are? Read fiction, which genre, dates, typical authors, what have you written? You haven't?? Failed.

Who knows. But I bet he hasn't. As the podcast about people who actually know him says.

I'm not "determined to dislike him". I dislike him for his actions. I dislike his lies and venal behaviour. I dislike his hypocrisy and sanctimony. I dislike his sexism. I dislike his inability to stand up for what is right for the country. I dislike his claim he "takes responsibility " for things that go wrong but then throws subordinates under the bus rather than resigning himself.

That's just my own view of course and I appreciate 5 or 6 people in the country might love him as PM.

I don't think that even you believes that he has never read about history, but there we are.

Yes it is hard to believe. But there we are.

It explains his reliance on procedure to take any decision. However bad the procedure is. Rather than conviction which he doesn't seem to possess.

Ok, you are determined to dislike him and think the worst. That's cool. I feel the same about Farage, nothing he did could please me because I loathe him.

I just don't think that not reading books is a fatal flaw in the ability to be a Prime Minister. I do think being highly intelligent and even tempered are useful. And I'm no big fan of Starmer, I think he's doing a decent job (particularly with Trump) but he's also pissed me off a few times.

How did you get your left wing views other than just from your own narrow experience (by narrow I mean just from your own life, not being rude).

You may not mean to be rude but you’re certainly managing it. My views don’t come from reading books, especially fiction. They come from the stories my parents told me about the inequality of society when they were children - my dad’s family were all miners. From an innate hatred of injustice and unearned privilege. From a love of fairness, equal opportunity and a wish to see a society in which all its members thrive. My paternal grandmother was a highly intelligent woman who was passionate about these things, she’d have been a brilliant MP had she been born at another time.

I for one think he’s doing a good job, he’s a listener and willing to make alterations if he’s given reason to. He is doing a great job with trump too, hence why trump doesn’t like him

I find it very difficult to believe he has never read about history during his education and previous career.

He likes reading about football, read Kafka's 'The Trial' and Kelman’s 'a Disaffection' according to previous interviews.

Well I think his previous job and experience would give him a pretty good view of human nature, history, and the world outside his bubble

Well thats often not true for a start. Even if you wotk as a lawyer in the area of death or human misery it doesnt necessarily give you empathy. In fact empathy might be a disadvantage as you are dealing in facts and likelihood of the success of your case. Your clients end up just being work only which often protects the lawyer's mental health. Not saying KS is like that but just saying his job doesnt necessarily mean he knows about human nature other than in a forensic way.

They cite people who know him. Unlike all of us presumably. His lack of empathy and interest in the lives of others could be partly explained by his lack of imagination due to not reading actually. One explanation anyway.

Well I think his previous job and experience would give him a pretty good view of human nature, history, and the world outside his bubble.

I'm interested in history but rarely read history books. I love books (but don't have a favourite... I have probably 20 favourites), did an Eng Lit degree, my mum was a librarian... but books aren't the only way to learn about the world. Especially nowadays. KS not being widely read is no big deal. He may also, of course, be protecting his private life to some extent, and couldn't be arsed to think up a lie he'd probably forget later. (David Cameron made up the football team he supported and then forgot.)