Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 102 comments are related to the topic:
why waste oxygen asking a pacifist if he would press the nuke button,
why waste oxygen asking a pacifist if he would press the nuke button,
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 102
|
By:
Which one of my posts offended you SF?
And is not standing for that a euphemism for I'm reporting you? I heard yer karaoke number was that old Tom Jones classic The Green Green Grass of B/Fair.  |
|
By:
Calling me a tw4t and a **** but I've crossed the line.
|
|
By:
When wee Nicki kicks the nukes out of Scotland we will be defenceless?
 |
|
By:
Not as easy as that kennybhoy.
Wee Nicki wants to remain in NATO so will have to accept Trident. |
|
By:
maybe she will change her mind like that Theresa wifie does.
|
|
By:
The English dont want the nukes in their country..i wonder why.
|
|
By:
I thort wee Nicki sayed she wanted the safe removal of them...no?
|
|
By:
does anyone know why Russia has them?
|
|
By:
sofiakenny
The English dont want the nukes in their country..i wonder why. There are 3 RN naval baes in the UK. Faslane, Devonport and Portsmouth. Faslane was chosen for both it's geographical position and the deep waters surrounding the base. Nicki says a lot of things but does very little. |
|
By:
So we can give Pompey or Davenport the nukes.
Who exactly are we afraid of?...Iraq North Korea China Russia??? |
|
By:
What would happen to all those employed at Faslane or the small local businesses that rely on them.
The area would be destroyed. Given the state of our economy can we really consider getting rid of Trident given that it would be relocated to another part of the UK. |
|
By:
Afraid of no one whilst we have Trident.
|
|
By:
Russua will have a reason for having them.
|
|
By:
They would be unemployed and would have to get on their bikes
Did you have such concerns when Thatcher destroyed mining communities? |
|
By:
Does anyone know what that is ?
|
|
By:
If we don't know why Russia has nuclear weapons then I would agree, there is no point in having them.
Does anyone know why Russia has them.. before we make any decisions. |
|
By:
Labour closed more mines than Thatcher.
|
|
By:
ok you may say an independent Scotland may not need them .
Of course Ireland didn't have any nuclear weapons, or any army or airforce to speak off ? And then again an independent Ireland didn't fight in WW2, but then again it didn't have to Britain did , and that was lucky for Ireland , and other countries . Who could deny that ? |
|
By:
If Kenny Hill keeps digging he'll have dug his own opencast mine
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Labour closed more mines than the Tories???...really?????
|
|
By:
Aye ackie..you need those massive nukes to feel safe in your midge infested midden.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
STUDYFORM
05 Jun 17 20:31 Joined: 26 Jan 05 | Topic/replies: 16,529 | Blogger: STUDYFORM's blog Well? You can't answer me can you? If it "DETERS" - and I believe I AM using English - Then the reason for it's doing so is simply that it (Nuclear weaponry) does so is that it stops opposing Nuclear weapons being used on us. Is THAT right? IN WHAT OTHER WAY DOES IT DETER ANYTHING? It also deters an invasion with conventional forces. An invader can not know at what stage the war would go nuclear so don't invade. Each Polaris missile has multiple warheads which can be independently targeted. Just one submarine could potentially destroy every major city in Russia. How many missiles would you want? The Russian stockpile represents massive overkill (pardon the expression). |
|
By:
Foinavon
 |
|
By:
Corbyn has ruled out a first strike. This tells Russia that it could invade and overwhelm our conventional forces with little danger to itself. Tempting to a man like Putin if he could come to a deal with Donald.
|
|
By:
Indeed the replacement trident has 4 new submarines with 160 warheads in total , just 1 warhead has 8 times the capability as the one that landed on Hiroshama , if this started a tit for tat battle mankind would be wiped out as well as everything else , money well spent eh
|
|
By:
Russia must have some reason for spending that sort of money, they will have a reason and if we could understand what it is we will be able to make a better decision about ours.
|
|
By:
Either Russia has a reason or it doesn't , perhaps anxious knows ?
|
|
By:
You miss the point anxious.
It will be money well spent in avoiding that scenario. Unless the whole world disarms, and how could you prove it, then nuclear weapons are a necessity for us. |
|
By:
Exactly if we all disarmed we would still have the knowledge to make another bomb there's no going back
|
|
By:
That's the problem though isn't it , how can the threat of war be reduced by spending bilions on more dangerous nuclear weapons
|
|
By:
It doesn't make sense at all , its like playing Russian Roulette
|
|
By:
anxious you go on about the old days with Utd so in football terms would you go down to the old Den with a bunch of shirts or a bunch of fellas who are going to stand their ground ?
|
|
By:
So you think we should disarm and hope the rest of the world does likewise?
That makes no sense. |
|
By:
Well yes in reverse , you have to fire the gun with bullets , or he has to fire it without.
If he has some and you have none who wins in Russian roulettete? |
|
By:
If we could get rid of all nuclear weapons, and I'm not sure how that could happen, the money saved and more would be spent on conventional forces with an even greater chance of WW3 taking place.
|
|
By:
No I never said that , but surely the most rational thing to do is to try to come to agreement and try to reduce the madness of the Arms race
|
|
By:
I don't want the ruskies handing me a loaded gun for Russian roulette,
and us handing them an empty revolver. That only ends one way . |
|
By:
You have to ask as well who profits from the Arms race ?
|