David Pro

@johnpaulpaumbo @shanaka86 Quite correct about Suez where the toll was used to repay the loan for its construction. A better analogy would be the Dover Straits, same width, if either France or the UK declared unilateral ownership and a toll. Or even Oresund, 2.5 km wide, Baltic entry...

People are wrongly sounding off about Suez which is a manmade internal canal through Egypt. Suez cannot be compared with an international waterway like Hormuz. A better comparison would be the Bosphorus Strait over which Turkey exercises considerable authority. Bosphorus is was a source of much tension among the British, French, Russians and Ottamans in the 19th Century and early 20th Century. In 1938 the Montreux Convention granted Turkey certain limited powers over the Bosphorus which continues to this day.

Buried in Iran’s five-point counterproposal to Trump’s 15-point peace plan is the single most consequential sentence of the entire war. Iran’s fifth ceasefire condition, via Press TV citing a senior political-security official: “Iran’s exercise of sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz is and will remain Iran’s natural and legal right, and it constitutes a guarantee for the implementation of the other party’s commitments, and must be recognized.” Read that again slowly. Iran is not asking for sanctions relief. It is not asking for reconstruction funds. It is demanding that the international community formally recognize Iranian sovereignty over the waterway through which one-fifth of the world’s oil, one-fifth of its LNG, and one-third of its helium must transit. If any version of this condition survives into a ceasefire, the IRGC toll regime at Hormuz becomes permanent. Not as an ad hoc wartime measure. As an internationally recognized sovereign right. Iran’s parliament is already drafting the legislation. MP Mohammadreza Rezaei Kouchi told Iranian media: “We provide its security, and it is natural that ships and oil tankers should pay such fees.” The bill is in the Civil Affairs Committee. Bloomberg reported it could be finalized within a week. Iran has signed but never ratified UNCLOS. Its 1993 domestic law requires prior authorization for warships and hazardous cargo transiting the strait. Some legal scholars characterize Iran as a “persistent objector” to the transit passage regime. The US maintains transit passage is customary international law. The legal question is unresolved. The physical question is not: Iran controls the northern shore and is enforcing a selective corridor at the point of a gun. GCC Secretary General al-Budaiwi called it “an aggression and a violation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” on March 26. He is correct on the law. He may be irrelevant on the outcome. The Suez precedent: Nasser nationalized in 1956. Reopened under Egyptian control in 1957. Excluded British pounds and French francs from the toll. The Suez Canal Authority has collected tolls in its chosen currencies for nearly seven decades. Crisis lasted months. Architecture lasted forever. Trump’s energy strike deadline is April 6. If the toll survives the war, the dollar loses its first chokepoint. open.substack.com/pub/shanakaans…

@SedeCatPA @Bigvadrouiller1 Not immediately, though younger brother Thomas made a mess of Baugé with John then presiding over the end but not before he'd founded the University of Caen. The decline followed the retirement and death of Henry IV & V's Lord Privy Seal, perhaps the real administrative power?

@ProphetsAble @Bigvadrouiller1 France won the war

When the Battle of Agincourt ended, King Henry V of England hastened with his army to Calais, leaving very little time to recover and bring back some of the bodies. The reinforcements deployed from Amiens heading north worried the English and left immediately. After their departure, the priests, peasants, farmers, and local militias decided to come to the battlefield to identify the bodies and look for possible survivors. This operation lasted for days. While some bodies were claimed by noble families and brought back, the others were either buried a few kilometers away in the Franciscan church of Hesdin or in the three large trenches dug across the battlefield to bury the bodies. According to the chronicles and the searches conducted by all those who participated in the operation, it was estimated that they had found 5,800 decomposing bodies at that time after the English had left.

@SedeCatPA @Bigvadrouiller1 True, but the victor writes the history.

@Bigvadrouiller1 *Azincourt

@alexjoh97319513 @sharrond62 @PankhurstEM It was a very reputable newspaper when it was The Manchester Guardian, but then those spivs in London hijacked it and the rest is now just....

@sharrond62 @PankhurstEM I have to disagree. The Graun has always been a rag.

The Guardian has become a rag! If every woman has to do a sex screening test no one is singled out. Let alone women of colour. What a disgusting racist comment. Sex screening has zero to do with ethnicity, & everything to do with biological sex. Nothing more.

@ShoahUkraine @Osinttechnical The missile will have been tracked and the launch site possibly identified. Coupled with the time taken to fuel the rocket, note that they only have about 50 launchers, that information will begin to identify the storage facilities for loitering aircraft/drones.

@Osinttechnical This is Shahab 3 liquid fuel rocket , almost 30 years old , are they at the bottom of their inventory?

Civilians film the remains of a liquid-fueled Iranian ballistic missile that fell on the West Bank tonight.

@Dovydas44444 I assume that the key for the countries in white has been cropped from the bottom of the description table at the bottom left.

🇺🇸US State Department’s map of the most dangerous countries (marked in red) for traveling or resident Americans. Obviously, the Middle East now is a no-go. 🇬🇧UK and most of Western Europe = the same level of “increased caution” as 🇨🇳China. Or 🇬🇱Greenland, for that matter …

@MaxNordau The Palestinian diaspora used to be 15% Jewish, 25% Christian and 40% Muslim with 20% other. Assume Sunni Hamas takes power does than mean the expulsion of 80% of the population? Hamas have nearly ethnically cleansed Gaza. Is the West Bank next?

The Constitution of the "State of Palestine" explicitly says: - Palestine is an Arab ethnostate - Palestine's official religion is Islam - Sharia law is the principle source of all legislation in Palestine Can't believe they tricked well-meaning westerners into falling for this garbage.

@Bigvadrouiller1 Also forgotten that Henry's Lord Privy Seal (NB the French King had ordered his property forfeit in 1408 when he voted for the Rome rather than French Pope) began preparations for the campaign at the start of 1415 when war seemed inevitable. When did French preparations begin?

I think this might be an opportunity to share my perspective on the Battle of Agincourt, as it tends to be oversimplified. There's a very sensitive issue surrounding the battle. Even today, England ultimately decided against using Agincourt as the name for a submarine due to international relations concerns. What really happened? What could have occurred to cause such a large part of the French knighthood and nobility to be massacred? To the point that, years later, Charles VII decided to no longer place his full trust in the knighthood, but rather in anyone who knew how to fight, regardless of nobleman or commoner? One thing is certain: it's incredibly complex, given the number of different sources and especially the chronicles of both sides, which can contradict each other. The same is true for modern works and the numerous debates between the French and English. Several versions exist of what happened, one where the English killed and executed the knights and a large part of the French army out of humiliation. The other version claims that the French knights were arrogant and foolish for charging on horseback into thousands of archers firing ten arrows a minute. Neither is in fact exactly true. Both sides shared a common problem that led to the catastrophe: panic, a natural reaction in any human being, noble or not. Yes, the French army had been arrogant the night before the battle, but by morning this was no longer the case. During the day, they saw that the English army had positioned itself at the narrowest point of the two forests, making it impossible to flank them on horseback, which had been Marshal Boucicaut's plan. But in addition, all the ranged troops (archers and crossbowmen) who were supposed to be in the front line had disappeared. They had been hastily and improvisedly moved to the rear, ultimately rendering them useless. Arguments had broken out among the dukes over which improvised plans to implement. Meanwhile, the English had already traveled 170 km, outnumbered and battling a dysentery epidemic that had already claimed over 1,000 lives during the siege of Harfleur. Having attempted to flee via Calais, they were blocked on the road by the French army and their morale was at rock bottom. It would be a bloodbath if they were to reach Calais. Both sides were in a state of panic on October 25th. Even though the French had numerical superiority, after these accumulated problems, many, including those on foot, lowered their heads, helmets and all, at the sight of the English arrow hail, to avoid being pierced by the visor. Despite armor capable of withstanding the onslaught, the psychological effect of the darkening sky also demoralized them. All had to charge into battle for honor, to die or not, or else a herald would write in his chronicle that such and such a knight bore this coat of arms and fled, and this would enter the annals of his family. For the English, especially the archers, some of whom were without pants due to dysentery, when they ran out of arrows they immediately resorted to hand-to-hand combat, filled with stress and fighting for their survival. After the battle and the successive waves of violence, including that of Duke John I of Alençon which even targeted King Henry V, thousands of prisoners were taken. However, we come to the crucial point: the massacre. What happened? The answer: Lord Ysembart of Agincourt and his army of 600 peasants. Though rarely mentioned, he and the lesser lords are indirectly responsible for it. The local lords near the battlefield, having learned of the French defeat and that thousands had been taken prisoner, decided to seize the opportunity. He and his local army attacked the rearguard of the English army, stealing, looting, and plundering equipment, treasures, and supplies. They even took a precious crown and the king's ceremonial sword. Panic gripped the English and King Henry V. Everything suggested that the French army had anticipated defeat and was seeking reinforcements. From the moment Englishmen rushed from the camp to warn the king of a surprise attack, Henry V suspected revenge in an emergency and ordered the immediate execution of all prisoners, noble or not, keeping only the most important. Few prisoners who had already been moved survived the order, and many Englishmen had refused to execute their prisoners for ransom. The King of England then appointed a nobleman with 200 archers to carry out the executions. When the English army and King Henry V arrived at the camp, everything was ransacked, and the peasants and lords had fled in haste with enormous booty. In the end, Henry V himself admitted to killing a "living bank" because of damn peasants and local lords who gave a false alarm about a counter-attack, or even surviving French rearguard troops who regrouped to attack desperately. This could have brought England a colossal fortune through ransoms for future warfare. Perhaps this is why the invasion of Normandy was only planned two years later. Henry V himself would say that the massacre was carried out according to God's justice anyway, that the French rearguard and the minor lords paid the price for their sins in this act. The chronicles of both sides try to exonerate themselves. The French died for their code of honor in a defeat that had become inevitable, and that it was suicidal. The English fought for their survival and, faced with the need to commit the unthinkable in the heat of the moment. Both sides fought hard, and both made mistakes that led to the catastrophe, which is still debated today. This battle remains one of the greatest tragedies in the History of the Hundred Years' War. Agincourt is not the victory of genius over arrogance, it is the triumph of survival over honor. I hope I've been able to shed some more light on this battle, which, for me, would take an extremely long time to study all the scenarios that unfolded for each warrior. To those who have no grave.

@laird01554927 The Royal Navy currently doesn't have enough sailors to man the ships that they've currently got. There needs to be higher retention and recruitment which can only be achieved by considerably higher pay. All before any shipbuilding.

Are people so thick, it takes 6-8 years to build new warships whether you vote Labour or not you can’t blame Labour. Also we are part of NATO you can can use any ships of the NATO group. #bbcqt

@GMB @wesstreeting It would be interesting to run the call that Morgan M Sweeney made to the police reporting the loss of his phone through the software used by insurers in call centres for the initial contact over an incident.

'I wonder if in this case it's more cock up than conspiracy,' says @wesstreeting. He's questioned following news the police are revisiting an investigation into the theft of Morgan McSweeney’s phone after admitting they recorded the wrong address when he reported the crime.

@ajcdeane @DPJHodges It might be productive to pursue the Russian links between Mandelson's mortgage, the Maxwells before reaching Epstein. One even had a predilection for older, rather than younger, women.

This is actually pretty inexplicable. The pettifogging hiding behind procedures will inevitably draw criticism prior to the eventual substantive response they’ll have to give. So it doesn’t make sense even on their terms.

@JanuszPaytos @jorleigh1 @RealAirPower1 On that basis then the RAF in the Battle of Britain made little economic sense. The cost of educating each pilot was many times greater than the value of the machines that they shot down. But each aircraft they shot down would save the lives of at least two people on the ground.

@ProphetsAble @jorleigh1 @RealAirPower1 Human life is priceless, I agree. I took economic criteria into account. You don't kill a mosquito with a nuke. That's an exaggeration, but I'd be furious if something like that flew over my head in London. I don't mean mosquitoes😁

While high-end assets like THAAD and the F-35 grab all the headlines, a "blue-collar" hero, as I like to call it, is quietly winning the drone war every night. The RAF Regiment’s Rapid Sentry system, deployed around Erbil, Iraq, has notched an incredible tally of ~50 Iranian drone intercepts since February 28. To put that in perspective, Rapid Sentry has downed roughly 10 times as many drones as the RAF’s fighter jets in the same theater! It’s the ultimate goalkeeper: a VSHORAD designed exclusively to tackle low and slow threats like the Shahed-136. 1/2

@YstradHistory @Mbakaza4L When you start changing the meaning of words to suit then chaos ensues. Randomly change the meaning of 'entropy' and you have confusion, especially: "Nothing is certain in life other than death, taxes and the second law of thermodynamics."

@ProphetsAble @Mbakaza4L Indeed, but it is a word where language has evolved. I would say over the last 30+ years it has come to mean/imply total destruction. It's not correct as to the origin, but it is how it is commonly used, perhaps as a synonym for "devastated"

There has never been a war in history where 80% of the country has been decimated, 100% of the population displaced and 50% of the deaths children… So let’s just call it for what it really is… this is a GENOCIDE

@JanuszPaytos @jorleigh1 @RealAirPower1 You stated that it doesn't seem very economical, so it seems very pertinent.

@ProphetsAble @jorleigh1 @RealAirPower1 You're right, of course. But that's also an explanation for using Patriot missiles. But that's not what we're talking about, is it?

@JanuszPaytos @jorleigh1 @RealAirPower1 It's the value of damage that the weapon can do, rather than the cost of the weapon. A bomb costing less than £1,000 to build could do £100 millions of damage if detonated in Central London. At this point a £50,000 missile seems very cheap if it destroys the incoming £1,000.

@jorleigh1 @RealAirPower1 So, the cost is still at least 20% higher than the Shahed. Not very economical, plus the production time. Of course, it's economically better than the Patriot

@almurray @TrentTelenko Posturing of any kind about anything is alien to the British. It's act or shut up.

@TrentTelenko What did earlier posturing about Greenland do to that relationship?

This is after PM Starmer broke US faith in the "special relationship." There will be long lasting strategic repercussions for this British domestic political theater that rival PM Anthony Eden's performance in the 1956 Suez Crisis. 1/2

@CarlBovisNature Regularly in the Cotswolds. I'm on nodding terms with one on the route of my summer evening constitutional.

If you see this photo of a Barn Owl coming at you, please leave a comment! 😊 When did you last see a Barn Owl? 🦉❤️

@Euan_MacDonald Putin began in St Petersburg as a kleptomaniac which will always be his manner. Russia always kills the reformers, Alexander II 'The Liberator' is an example whose reforms led to the founding of Yuzivka. Perhaps the long term cycle of justice that Putin will fall over Donetsk?

“(Putin) regime supporters are very, very nervous indeed.”

@Gillian11135191 @happinesskitbag @LucyGoBag The definition of a hundred year event is that there is a 1% chance of it happening in a given year. It is not an event that will only happen once in every hundred years. York, a dry city, has about 150 days of rain every year, possibly 10 days of heavy rain?

@happinesskitbag @LucyGoBag In Doncaster we had a severe flood in 2000. The EA said it was a once in a 100 year event. The next one was 2007 (Lucy was there) and the next was 2019 ......

Why use a phrase that is routinely hated as a meaningless metric for measuring risk?