In the news

Why was it pink before?

This year's Giro winner being from London I'd say

Not just from London.

On here.

So mundane, I thought it was in celebration of rainbow unicorns. Such disappoint

🌈 🦄

Oh cool! Remember looking up the Giro results to see why the logo would've been pink and just assumed it was a UK/London thing

It did have rainbow-esque stripes at some point in the past.

Some forumenger won some World 24h eating championship or something out in Borrego Springs, California.

I've been witness to their training regime of wolfing down bowls upon bowls of bigos at Wests, insane dedication. Not sure if the 'hiding competitors bikes in the toilets' bit of the training was actually used in competition though.

Is there a source for this? Terrible news.

https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/356604/#comment15647071

I think it's this. Horrible news.

RIP Martyn

It was on our club forum as well, with this added later.

https://twitter.com/Theboyonabike/status/1327959079143223302

Pretty unpleasant reading

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1119/1179086-australia-war-crimes/

I suspect there is going to be much more coming out about this. Some of these operations were UK special forces led with Australian assistance and so far the UK has strenously denied all charges.

In this case, it was Australian solders who blew the whistle:

When the RMP interviewed the Special Forces troops who took part in the raid of 16 February 2011, all of them claimed they could not remember the specifics of the mission that night.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53597137

But.... poppies.......

On that day that Boris announces the largest increase in military spending in 30 years....

To "defend the realm".

Fuck. Right. Off.

Fuck. Right. Off.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. Now is not the time, if ever.

However, from a global political perspective I think its fair to say that the next few decades run a high risk of being less peaceful rather than more peaceful that we are now. I can see the logic behind the decision evem if I don't agree with it.

Its not a coincidence that the various people I know who work in military and intelligence almost all vote Tory. Its good for them, innit.

Worth also mentioning how badly the military have been hit by austerity. Most soliders have to top up their own equipment out of their own pockets now days. Whilst I'm opposed to military strengthning in principle, I feel fairly strongly that the military we do have should be kept as safe and well equipped as possible if we're sending them into harms way.

Its not a coincidence that the various people I know who work in military and intelligence almost all vote Tory. Its good for them, innit.

It's just such a waste of funds when we're going to need them most. Amazing that there isn't money for kids food or for self-employed who are out of work, or for people who can't move because of cladding or, or, or but there is £16bn to buy us some new guns.

The wording is also very nationalist and presents an us vs the world narrative that isn't based in reality.

It's just such a waste of funds when we're going to need them most. Amazing that there isn't money for kids food or for self-employed who are out of work, or for people who can't move because of cladding or, or, or but there is £16bn to buy us some new guns.

I suppose the counter argument is creating jobs but yeah totally agree that the timing and context stinks and that the messaging is deliberately pitched to appeal to people who fondly reminisce about the good old days in the Falklands.

I suppose its possible to think this ^ but also think that its shit to send people into conflict without equipping them properly.

what fucking use is a squadron of fighter jets unless they're going to be used to strafe the offices of cambridge analytica, because that's how wars are fought nowadays.

^ not to mention that those fighter jets will inevitably be inevitably delivered late and ridiculously over budget...

what do you expect when the contract to build them is awarded to an upmarket decorating supplies company with £9.75 in the bank that just so happens to be run by the nephew of a prominent tory donor.

Agreed, makes no sense to me to do the whole "you are heroes" stuff and then not actually protect people.

As a previous neighbour said: They can spend 1 million on a missile, but can't fix the streetlights. (all 3 lights had popped and it was...pretty dark)

Cool expensive tech is cool, but protecting actually people? Seems less of a thing... we have to see how it is spent, if it is new expensive tech again, it won't go to actual soldiers.

(though a better tank is of course a bonus if people are shooting at you) :)

I suppose its possible to think this ^ but also think that its shit to send people into conflict without equipping them properly.

It won't be spent on soldiers salaries, their shitty homes on bases or equipment they hold in their hands.

It'll be spent on giant shiny things so that ministers can stand next to something giant and shiny and say they paid for it so that idiots will vote for them.

Same as it ever was.

A chunk of money is for the National Cyber Force though.

Your next job could be in Cyber, you just don't know it yet.

Sadly I think you're right.

And soldiers will still be buying their own body armour and boots.