Trident renewal

yes

This debate is a complete waste of Parliamentary time , do you support this Spiv inspired waste of time a pathetic attempt by the Spivs to show some division in the Labour Party

yes

wonder what the PM has put in her letter of last resort? Nuke Boris?

Here comes charisma!

Is it worth forking out for?

I do wonder what sort of woman Corbyn's wife is. He keeps going out in ill fitting shirts about a collar size too big and most times cannot seem to do his tie up properly. Most people I know with a wife manage to dress themselves.

JC being shate upon big time by his own backbenchers, weak effort to get his case across

The tories new what they were doing with this debate , what they have done is let Blairite Labour MPS attack the Leader of THE Labour Party catte blanche

of course the tories knew what they are doing, a least one party does, I am sure the lab backbenchers didn't need any encouragement to put this lame duck down.

Corbyn couldn't run a pub let alone a Country.

The Blairites will not be laughing on September 24th when they have had another thrashing.

There's a village somewhere looking for its idiot. Go home. They're getting anxious.

anxious  -  two points which you may agree with, 1. democracy needs  a strong oppossition. 2. labour with JC as leader cannot win a GE.
btw  I admire you in a way, I have read all of your posts on various freds and although you are vastly outnumbered on most occasions you stick to your guns. respect.

then Wurzel will be crying because he will not be leader of the opposition

Yes i do believe that democracy needs a strong oppostion  thats why i am puzzled that 172 expressed no- confidence in the leader of the Labour Party despite winning a overwhelming victory in last years leadership election , on your other point is there any evidence that Labour will do better with any leader other than Jeremy and to be honest you could have Jesus Christ himself as Labour leader and they would be ridiculed and torn apart by the Establishment, the square mile and the vicious right wing press

most of the 172 who voiced their reasons said it was because of weak or non-exsistant leadership, having given him support early on it quickly became apparent he could not do the job in respect of leading a strong opposition, I accept he as massive support with labour activists but that will not get him elected to government, a split in the party looks @ 1.01

Lord West

"nasty b astard"

I listened to a show the other night broadcast from Comrade Jezza's local boozer in Islington. They questioned 6 local Labour activists and the mug from Momentum said they were not bothered about being in power as long as Corbyn was the leader, the yoof love him though. Is that the same yoof that couldn't be bothered to vote in the referendum?

its 100 billion - i posted before - ch4 news pages.

it's not an independent deterrent - we make the warheads(yes).
the missiles are from USA.
Some say we cannot fire them without express permission
from the USA? so we have to phone up? while their missiles
are heading here.
Save cash by getting rid of submarines.
we can have missiles that fire from trucks, you see these
in moscow parades etc.
ICBM - intercontinental ballistic missiles.

we can maintain - having the bomb, just scaled down to save dosh.

If we have 100 billion we can't spend elsewhere we can have subs.

The five nuclear-weapon states under the NPT
United States     1,750 - 6,970
Russia     1,790 - 7,300    
United Kingdom     150 - 215
France     290 - 300    
China     n.a. / 260

Non-NPT nuclear powers
India     n.a. / 110–120
Pakistan     n.a. / 120–130
Israel     n.a. / est. 60–400

The problem with the ICBM is they have a maximum distance they can travel (around 1500 miles I believe)

The submarines can strike from anywhere in the world so remain the indeterminate factor for any hostile foreign power

"it's not an independent deterrent - we make the warheads(yes).
the missiles are from USA. Some say we cannot fire them without express permission
from the USA? so we have to phone up?"

Ignorant / lying left wing tw*ts who don't know what they are talking about say that, it's not true.
Probably most grauniad readers think it though, which explains a lot.

You see here the frothing bloodthistry right wing maniacs here , they blame the Guardian for most things

From the guy who's every second post is some rant referencing "Murdoch"!

That is because Murdoch does have an unhealthy interest in control in  this country , himself and other right win press barons do attempt to influence government policy , but in Murdochs case he has plenty of form for lying and misinforming the British public you only have to look at such despicable lies such as Hillsborough to reach conclusion over the garbage his so called empire churns out

go and iron your brown shirt

Feck off Burton and get on with saving Nigel and Donny

The Don will save you anx don't worry

Stop ganging up on anxious please!

If they are ever used it's end of the world.
radiation will wipe us out.
remember a hydrogen device has never been
used on any population.
So does it matter if ICBM's have a limited range.
The USA our allied have bases around the world.
with missiles in them. The usa has 250 bases. Not
all have missiles but you can see they've covered
all the bases? The have 60 missiles in Turkey according
to the Russians. They were a bit worried during the coup.
In 1962 the USA withdrew their missiles after the soviets
backed down and removed their Cuban presence.
They must have put them back? America has enough to deal with
any of them. Why do we need 4 subs with forty missiles?
It's never going to be used.

" America has enough to deal with any of them. Why do we need 4 subs with forty missiles?
    ^^^^^^^^  Z ƃuᴉʞuᴉɥʇ uʍop ǝpᴉsd∩  ^^^^^^^^

Hope we're not 'back of the queue' when we need the good 'Ol USA' to defend us.

from who?

and i'm still not going to sleep with you

Aaaaaawwwww, unrequited love is a bore (line from Glad to be Happy Mamas and Papas) Who knows JS today's friends can turn out to be tomorrows enemy's???? Trident is not just for Xmas you know, it's for the foreseeable future, I use the word foreseeable adviseately.

Advisedly*** ffs.

you aint putting no tridents up my rear that's for sure

will we fire it at the yanks?

genuine spitting out the coffee moment,


"will we fire it at the yanks?"   Only if they keep us at the back of the queue,

why is it some of here can have differences but still have a laugh yet all too often it turns into a verbal yet futile fight?

if donny wins at least we know scotland will be safe

Scotland will be one giant golf course with wee Jimmy Krankie lookalike caddies. It' all good fun JS.

feck off, i want ivana trump lookalike caddies

we voted for thermonuclear war.
instead of new air craft carriers + planes +
more stuff for our troops.

Vote to Renew goes through !

vote to burn money - nothing for healing people - only for
fireballs. sanity loses.

judgement day draws closer.

Does anyone remember the film Fail Safe (1960s) but remade more recently with George Clooney involved - as the result of a mistake the USA destroyed Moscow - the Russians were intent on retaliation which would have meant all out nuclear war but the US president ordered the dropping of a bomb on to New York to keep the "peace" - even if millions died

Purely hypothetical (the problem is with the nuclear weapon all scenarios are just that because nobody knows what would really happen) - if the USA inadvertently destroyed London because of a calamitous mistake - would they permit us to destroy a major American city as a means to retain the status quo - somehow I doubt it - frightening thought

Surely the debate about Trident and nuclear weapons is a bit like the gun debate in the United States the more guns people have the more they are likely to be used often with tragic circumstances , the more nuclear weapons and another arma race surely with somed crazed fanatics getting hold of them the more likely something disastrous might happen , you dont have less nuclear weapons by threatening someone with more or mass murder, one warhead would cause 8 times the carnage that Hiroshama suffered does the human race really want that to happen again never mind the financial cost

^ That. Having them is a countdown to someone using one and the first one wont be justified and will be a nutter.
Also cant think of any valid circumstances for using one. If someone fired one at us, then given the choice between a surgical strike to take out their military or a big fat nuke that will indiscriminately kill thousands of innocents, how is the nuke retaliation ever going to be justified?

video recorders used to cost $10,000
now you can get one for £25.

dvd players were £500
now £25

used to be 2 atom bombs in 1945
over 20,000 now.

can you keep track of 20,000 items? in any secure location. like a vault.

wars? conflicts? - some stuff is gonna go south.
sunami hits and earthquake a meteor strike.
someone - a nut will get one.

Jul 18, 2016 -- 5:58PM, Burton-Brewers wrote:

I listened to a show the other night broadcast from Comrade Jezza's local boozer in Islington. They questioned 6 local Labour activists and the mug from Momentum said they were not bothered about being in power as long as Corbyn was the leader, the yoof love him though. Is that the same yoof that couldn't be bothered to vote in the referendum?

If any of you know much about Labour party activists, I'll own up to knowing a fair few, I'm concerned with the naivety I see in young Corbyn fans who are being manipulated by the Momentum types.

Power is not their objective. They believe they can do more in protest. This point has not been raised in any great detail by the media, even the 172 MPs have been guarded in their criticism.

I am sure MI6 are considering taking out Trump if he gets any where near power.....they wouldn't want that deranged chimp within a mile of the Nuke buttons !

Ukraine had the third-biggest nuclear arsenal in the world.

Gave them all up in return for guarantees of peace, cooperation and territorial integrity from Russia, the US, the Uk and France.

Russia have been warned.....Any more sh*t from them and they will get a big slap !

(They have been very quite lately)

glad to see someone else has picked up on Momentum jumper, they need closer scrutiny.

The Scottish people don't want 'em. If you lot want them, take them and put them on the Thames, and pay for 'em yourselves.

Russia 7,000
UK 215

what happens when we have shot our load?

Nothing much, I would have thought. Multiple hydrogen bombs have that sort of effect.

It has been reported that a significant poll places support for Trident in Scotland ahead of opposition to the system.

[i]Results from an ICM poll have been circulating in the press and on social media and here they are:

Follow
Britain Elects @britainelects
Scotland // On keeping Trident:
Support: 43%
Oppose: 42%
(via ICM)
12:44 PM - 22 May 2016

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/poll-suggests-scots-back-keeping-trident/

Link goes on to explain why the myth has arisen that the US has control over the UK deterrent, and why the myth is b0ll0cks.

seems to be a few on here under that illusion screaming

Ukraine had the third-biggest nuclear arsenal in the world.

Gave them all up in return for guarantees of peace, cooperation and territorial integrity from Russia, the US, the Uk and France.

Spot on. There wouldn't be a war in Europe at the moment if Ukraine had have kept it's nuclear weapons.

Fair enough if you are against renewal because you are of the view that Nuclear weapons themselves should not exist but to be against renewal because at this current moment in time there are more significant security risks which nuclear weapons do not assist us with is naive in the extreme.

It's laughable to hear that Mhairi Black give a speech in parliament quoting the 2015 National Security strategy and saying that nuclear weapons do not prevent the 3 biggest threats to UK security. The very fact that she quotes the '2015 review' is acknowledgement that this strategy is updated on an annual basis and that the main threats can change on a yearly basis so to try and use this as a reason to not bother with a replacement which in itself can take 17 years to complete is simply bizarre.

"It's laughable to hear that Mhairi Black give a speech in parliament .."
You do realise the entire rest of your post is redundant and you could have saved yourself a whole lot of typing

MP asked the PM is she willing to fire a Atomic Missile at
a city of with expected casualties of 100,000 if she has to?

Theresa says - yes.

It's a hydrogen bomb? what major city is going to have such a low population?

London is 8.6 million. NewYork the same. Moscow is 12 million.

Maybe they are targeting cities like Edinburgh? ( the russians not our mob ).

They can chose the target and AFAIK dial the size of the boom.

if you use one. that's one.
immediately the other side fires all of theirs.

to think they are gonna fire one back at you is a nice thought.
delusional.

She answered the question given, what more can she do?

anxious    18 Jul 16 16:25 
Is it worth nearly 40 billion to renews weapons of mass destruction ?


£40bn is the cost of 1 sub.

4 subs + upkeep = £205bn

Obscene

Yes i did use that as lower scale figure, furthermore 4 subs with a total of 160 warheads is complete madness , just one warhead has 8 times the power the bomb which dropped on Hiroshama

Mankind would be destroyed by one or two warheads its truly unbelievable that people seem to revel in these weapons of mass destruction and murder

I guess however if you listen to the likes of the Sun, the Daily mail, the Torygraph you will be persuaded by such absurd arguments.

No, when you're arguing with the sort of people who say 40 billion is the cost of one sub (wrong), quote CND figures, or asy that we need to ask the US for permissiong to use them (total rubbish) or don't understand why we need 4 subs when it's very simple to understand, that's when smart people who know anything about the subject know you guys will never be persuaded by logical arguments...

Just checking is that the kind of world you want for children and grandchildren one where countries stockpile nuclear weapons, the more you have the more likely they will be used by some maniac, the arms race as it is called is the race to oblivion.

Genie is out of bottle. The numbers of them has been going down not up. Wanting unilateral disarmament is a simple proof of having no sense, look at the typical CND protestor, I rest my case.

after Polaris? or even during - why didn't we design our own missiles?

why rely on foreign technology ?

we build the warheads - why not the missiles?

seems odd.

more jobs?

If we were china ? or the soviet union?

we would reverse engineer a missile and build our own.

russia reverse engineered the fiat car into the lada.

it's all under wraps so the americans would never
see how we came up with them?

so why are we still paying a tax? to america?
unless it's all a bluff.