Ersatz TLS discussion

Robert wrote: "Logger24 wrote: "AB76 wrote: "...i think whoever led the USSR in 1941 would have defeated the Germans, Russia was too vast for Napoleon and the USSR was even vaster for Hitler. I would have imagine..."

very interesting Robert

General Halder seemed also to be conscious of the scale of the task, he recalled in his diary a trip from somewhere deep in Ukraine back to the East Prussian HQ and was in awe at the distance travelled and by how much further the Germans still would have to go, that distance and more to reach the Soviet lines and then far distant into the Urals

i havent travelled in Russia but i can imagine the monotony of the plains in summer, the sheer scale of the advances needed must have been on every sensible german officers mind. Blitzkreig worked on the small distances between Germany and the North sea (holland) and Belgium and the channel, tiny distances and even there the Dunkirk question remains, had the ultra-blitz of Guderian outrun the supply lines? One can imagine how stretched they were within days of crossing into Russia in 1941

i may have stated it here before but the other thing that made me realise the scale of the German task was only learned when i read the excellent Luftwaffe Diaries a few years ago. Luftwaffe success against the Soviet air force was devastating in the first month of the invasion, the soviet losses were colossal but luftwaffe intelligence had worked out that even by late summer 1941, the Soviets had replaced every plane lost and their total war industry was now ramping up producing new planes, the German losses were not replaced as fast

AB76 wrote: "Robert wrote: "Logger24 wrote: "AB76 wrote: "...i think whoever led the USSR in 1941 would have defeated the Germans, Russia was too vast for Napoleon and the USSR was even vaster for Hitler...."

Robert, AB - Very interesting, thanks.

"We find the defendants incredibly guilty, Your Honor!"

I've finished Ian Rankin's Rebus novel. It ends at the beginning of trial, and it feels appropriate to give Mel Brooks the last word. The person I'd thought key to the mystery wasn't the one I'd picked, but is surely guilty of something.

This book comes at the end of a long series, and the cast is very big. Rebus or DI Clarke will confront a half-familiar face, leaving me uncertain whether the voice is that of a cop, and if so whether it is one of the bent cops or a good one, or is another sort of witness altogether. Perhaps I should have imitated the friend who kept a list of the characters in War and Peace, arranging them by group. This will be my last Rankin for a while.
I did learn that "A Heart Full of Headstones" is a line from a song by someone named Jackie Levin.

Logger24 wrote: "I’ve never read any Bukowski. Sounds as though this might be one to try. I like the story of Great Legs Dunaway.."

You get to see them if you click on the link! It's an uneven book, but the great thing (for me) was that it made me laugh quite often... but bear in mind that humour is a very individual thing.

Robert wrote: ""We find the defendants incredibly guilty, Your Honor!"

I've finished Ian Rankin's Rebus novel. It ends at the beginning of trial, and it feels appropriate to give Mel Brooks the last word. The pe..."

Rankin (or 'Rebus') has a penchant for what are to most of us obscure Scottish bands or singers... here is Jackie Leven singing his song 'Single Father', which includes the line used as the book title:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_88tn...

In searching for that, I also found a discussion with Rankin about the book itself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6gwx...

I'll probably read it, having read all the others, though as I've said before I preferred the younger, more vigorous Rebus to the old codger he now is... it's bad enough getting old yourself without your literary heroes doing the same!

i must research if any USA administration will have more power than Trump in January. I cant remember if Raegan had the house and senate in 1980 and in 1984. Ofc he didnt have the Supreme Court

AB76 wrote: "i must research if any USA administration will have more power than Trump in January. I cant remember if Raegan had the house and senate in 1980 and in 1984. Ofc he didnt have the Supreme Court"

One concern to those of us not well versed in US jurisprudence is the thought that Trump might attempt to amend the constitution to serve additional terms. According to a blog (below) this seems to be almost impossible by legal means. I hope our US friends agree with what is set out!

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/t...

Edit: of course it must be remembered that his good buddy Putin pulled such a stunt in Russia, by getting Medvedev to take the role for four years...

scarletnoir wrote: "AB76 wrote: "i must research if any USA administration will have more power than Trump in January. I cant remember if Raegan had the house and senate in 1980 and in 1984. Ofc he didnt have the Supr..."

i fully expect a third term attempt, he would be a fool not to try and go the whole hog, as he can now change the USA how he wants to, by destroying the government depts and agencies and creating a new Trumpian system. He is a fool and i dont want him to suceed in anything but the USA will be a different place by 2028, if a world war hasnt already broken out!

I also wonder what revenge he will take on all those who obstructed him last time. The Justice Dept will probably get a long list of democrats and civil servants to arrest and send to jail

Uncivil Society by Stephen Kotkin is a study of 1989 and what caused the fall of the eastern bloc, asking some very interesting questions.

Very much like a new book out on soviet dissedents, Kotkin identifies that the so called "civil society" in the eastern bloc from 1960-89 was miniscule and had very little impact in the communist system. These critics and dissedents were a small minority, many who were clearly at one with the status quo before rebelling.

Kotkin wants to look at the more powerful state apparatus in these states, the "uncivil society", which eventually collapsed due to its limitations, mistakes and the loss of soviet backing under Gorbachov. The study looks at the DDR, Poland and Romania. He does concede that the one state with a very well developed civil society was Poland, it had Solidarity and the unions, the church and the intellgensia forming a significant wedge of opposition in the 1980s

AB76 wrote: "i must research if any USA administration will have more power than Trump in January. I cant remember if Raegan had the house and senate in 1980 and in 1984. Ofc he didnt have the Supreme Court"

Obama had majorities in the Senate and the House in his first two years and managed to accomplish very, very little

Paul wrote: "AB76 wrote: "i must research if any USA administration will have more power than Trump in January. I cant remember if Raegan had the house and senate in 1980 and in 1984. Ofc he didnt have the Supr..."

thanks for that Paul, i had forgotten this, wow, brain-fade central here, i now remember how Obama struggled. it was an uphill task as he came in as the 2008 crash was still creating merry hell for the world

Lets hope that trump can achieve very, very little too

The Leavetaking by John McGahern(1974), continues my appreciation of this remarkable but not prolific Irish author

The language is exquisite, something that the Irish writers are always superb at, i can feel the Banville was influenced by McGahern, although McGahern is a master of less, rather than more. I am not sure how much he revised his short 200 odd page novels but they seem perfectly composed and nothing lingers or starts to become a nusiance.

An affair with a divorcee has meant the main character faces the sack from his teaching role and he recalls various stages of his life on the final day at the school.

The themes and storylines are familiar, it seems McGahern re-wrote his own life over and over but never losing the skill to make it all seem new again, every time.

This week's Tom Gauld:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/pic...

Gpfr wrote: "This week's Tom Gauld:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/pic..."

Meanwhile:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c...

Bet the guy doesn't get sent to prison like some tweeters have.

The Broad Highway – Jeffrey Farnol. This is the book that was the best-selling novel in the world in 1911 (and again in the US in 1961). Farnol was a British writer who published some forty romance novels, many like this one set in the Regency period, as a result of which he was regarded as the male counterpart of Georgette Heyer. Here Farnol tells an involved story centred around a young man of good family who despite being well-educated (a first in Classics) now finds himself almost penniless. He sets off to walk the length of southern England. In the event, the broad highway of life takes him no further than Kent, where he becomes a blacksmith. Every short chapter is filled with incident (robbery, pugilism, duelling, mysterious gentlemen, beautiful young ladies in distress, mistaken identity, country inns, tinkers, peddlers, steaming coach-horses, ghosts, etc). I have to say that, on the evidence of this book, the comparison with Georgette Heyer is most unfair to her. The wit and vivacity that delight the readers of her books are, alas, largely absent. While the young man does have certain admirable qualities – courage, honesty, honour - the only funny bit in 500 pages is when the dashing girl who is clearly in love with him says she wishes he were not so dreadfully precise and serious, and so very solemn and austere, and ponderous and egotistical and calm, so hatefully calm and placid, and a pedant. She’s right! Plus, people get killed, which I don’t think happens in any of GH’s Regency novels. Still, the story does develop a certain momentum, and it builds to a very good climax and an emotionally satisfying conclusion.

giveusaclue wrote: "Gpfr wrote: "This week's Tom Gauld:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/pic..."

Meanwhile:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/article..."

Tom Gauld is a treasure.

AB76 wrote: "i must research if any USA administration will have more power than Trump in January. I cant remember if Raegan had the house and senate in 1980 and in 1984. Ofc he didnt have the Supreme Court"

Surely the most powerful administration was Franklin Roosevelt's, though it went on for over 12 years, a thing impossible now, and was supported by a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress for the whole period.

Robert wrote: "AB76 wrote: "i must research if any USA administration will have more power than Trump in January. I cant remember if Raegan had the house and senate in 1980 and in 1984. Ofc he didnt have the Supr..."

4 years of both chambers is very impressive and ofc three terms, so maybe that is the most powerful. As Paul observed a few days ago Obama had the same set up as Trump and achieved very little

my own hesitiation on trump being unable to do much is the craven nature of his loyalists, the republicans rarely play fair and the fact that any republican who opposes trump policy will face a social media hate campaign everyday from his vile base