Tory Country

[Albertini]

Iran doesn't have nukes, whre are you getting that off, 2ndly USA would not sit by and allow Iran to start threatening people. North Korea is a tin pot 3rd world nation on the other side of the world that couldn't even win a war with South Korea.

What would anyone want to threaten us with?

 

Iran has a nuclear program, which it is speculated is either active now or will be active in the next 1-4 years. no one knows for certain.

 

We're talking about defence over the next 30 years.

 

So you don't want to be a poodle to America but you expect to rely on them if Iran or anyone else threatens us? Don't you see the contradiction in that?

 

North Korea is a tinpot country, i didn't say it wasn't, but it is one with nukes.

[dennis tooth]

What i'm saying i have answered in my last post. The stuff about wars is not moot in my opinion. The last world war ended on the basis of a nuclear bomb being used.

 

Had those nuclear bombs been available in 1939 would the second world war have started and had it done so and nukes were used in the first weeks would the cost in lives and money been as great as it was without the nukes?

 

The point is that not having nukes doesn't stop wars and indeed the opposite seems more realistic. Since nukes were developed there hasnt been a major world war. Prior to nukes there were two world wars which killed countless milllions and cost this country far more in monetary terms than the cost of having nukes costs now.

 

Norway isn't a reasonable comparison. we are the 4th or 5th richest country in the world, and we are one of the permanent members of the Security Council. Our influence and involvement around the world has been and always will be more significant than Norway's!

 

I do not diagree about the US's influence on our nuclear deterent and that needs addressing.

 

You can't simply trot out the "nukes or hospital" argument becuase it doesnt hold up. There is far more to a country than simply building hospitals. Health is one part but so is defence of the country and its citizens from all threats that are apparent now and will emerge over the next 30 years.

 

We could remove all our armed forces, our welfare state, law and order, transport, education, foreign aid and everything else simply and build more hospitals, but what would be the point if we had no defence, no law and order and no education?

 

What we could do though is cut our debt interest payments which equate for almost 45% of our health spending, then we could build more hospitals. We could have also not bothered with the NHS IT system and saved £10 billion for new hopstials there.

 

It's about balancing all aspects of our national needs and requirments. Defence is one aspect as important as health.

 

The 2nd world war was already won when they dropped the nukes, the Japs had nowhere to go and ready to surrender the USA dropped the bombs as an experiment and to set the tone for the future as a warning to anyone else, the best it did is speed it up a little.

You struggle to name someone that would want or even have a motive for invading us, come on now.

No one is arguing about defence per se but we have to build to what we are realistically and a nuclear deterrent is not relevant at all to us. Iran is already boxed in by it's surrounding countries and the US needs little excuse to bomb it into oblivion, same for Isreal, they just wouldn't attack us as they wouldn't even get past those two.

It's not just about health there are a million things we could better spend the money on. The Russians economy was ruined by trying to go down this route, the recent wars have also been a big waste of money and our biggest perceived threat is terrorism for which nukes are only an additional hazard to our own population.

[Anubis]

See how fast the Argies march in once the subs have gone.

 

Like when we nuked them in 1982?

[Anny Road]

We'll have to find somewhere else to park our subs soon because Salmond won't have them in an Independent Scotland.

[Anny Road]

Like when we nuked them in 1982?

 

Like when we made their entire fleet run for home because of our subs. We won't keep the subs if we aint going to launch nukes from them.

[dennis tooth]

Iran has a nuclear program, which it is speculated is either active now or will be active in the next 1-4 years. no one knows for certain.

 

We're talking about defence over the next 30 years.

 

So you don't want to be a poodle to America but you expect to rely on them if Iran or anyone else threatens us? Don't you see the contradiction in that?

 

North Korea is a tinpot country, i didn't say it wasn't, but it is one with nukes.

 

Iran you are speculating based on misinformation, if you think Isreal and the US would allow it to have or develop nukes then you don't know much.

We would be reliant on the US regardless so I don't see your point. The USA is more likely to invade us than any of the countries you have mentioned.

North Korea is on it's knees and the few nukes it does have would struggle to get anywhere near us and the first country they want to go to war is South Korea, again the US wouldnt be likely to stand by if it did attack anyone, they don't like commies with nukes but we'd be pretty far down on it's list of targets, nukes or no nukes. The USA doesn't take NK serious though as it know's NK's on it's knees. The US defences in Europe would shoot their nuke down long before it got anywhere near us even if it could reach us, which is can't.

[dennis tooth]

Like when we made their entire fleet run for home because of our subs. We won't keep the subs if we aint going to launch nukes from them.

 

I'll have a guess that the GDP of the FALKLANDS is about 20 sheep and that our nukes are a bit of a heavy price to pay for it.

[Anubis]

Like when we made their entire fleet run for home because of our subs. We won't keep the subs if we aint going to launch nukes from them.

 

And you know that how?

 

Warfare has changed since 1982. The majority of major strikes are carried out bay aircraft and unmanned drones.

[Anny Road]

I'll have a guess that the GDP of the FALKLANDS is about 20 sheep and that our nukes are a bit of a heavy price to pay for it.

 

When the billions of pounds worth of oil from the south Atlantic starts being tapped it will be considerably more than that.

[Anny Road]

And you know that how?

 

Warfare has changed since 1982. The majority of major strikes are carried out bay aircraft and unmanned drones.

 

I know that because Trident, our nuke of choice, is a sub based delivery system. We will not build billion pound subs just to fire torpedos.

[Anubis]

I know that because Trident, our nuke of choice, is a sub based delivery system. We will not build billion pound subs just to fire torpedos.

 

You don't know that at all because you're not the Defence Secretary. And you haven't addressed my point about the change in warfare.

[dennis tooth]

When the billions of pounds worth of oil from the south Atlantic starts being tapped it will be considerably more than that.

 

Yep but that's theft of Argentina's resources, the Argies don't even have any nukes and the USA certainly wouldn't allow us to use them on them anyway.

[Anny Road]

Yep but that's theft of Argentina's resources, the Argies don't even have any nukes and the USA certainly wouldn't allow us to use them on them anyway.

 

Of course it's theft thats why we have nukes. They would tell us to fuck off otherwise

[dennis tooth]

Of course it's theft thats why we have nukes. They would tell us to fuck off otherwise

 

Alrighty then!

[WaltonRed]

The Falklands has never belonged to the argies anyway has it?

[Phoenix]

I have to say the Tooth is talking sense.

 

As for Falklands....surely the scrapping of Harrier Jets and parts of the Navy as a whole will have more of an effect rather than trying to hang on with superpowers.

[Section_31]

The Falklands has never belonged to the argies anyway has it?

 

Argentina's claims to the Falklands stems from the fact it's 'quite close'. By this logic we can realistically lay claim to France.

 

They'll never get near the Falklands again with their tinpot shit as long as there's four typhoons stationed there. It's a proper Firefox fest over there.

[Strontium]

Gotta feel for the dog; say what you like but he's very passionate about his politics, he must be feeling disillusioned at the minute.

 

 

Politics is no place for people who honestly try to do their best. You might get traction for a while, but sooner or later you get chewed up and spat out by the conniving, calculating bastards and their vested interests.

 

People get the governments they deserve.

[cochcaer]

Some very angry Libs today who feel betrayed. Hope the irony isn't lost on them.

[Section_31]

It's pretty depressing that the Tories didn't do worse in the locals, kind of backs up the original point of the thread really. My future and my government is being decided constantly by people who, quite frankly, live in a diefferent England to me.

[Cardie]

 

Politics is no place for people who honestly try to do their best. You might get traction for a while, but sooner or later you get chewed up and spat out by the conniving, calculating bastards and their vested interests.

 

People get the governments they deserve.

 

Not the ones they voted for though.

[Albertini]

Iran you are speculating based on misinformation, if you think Isreal and the US would allow it to have or develop nukes then you don't know much.

 

So you are saying that Iran doesn't have or isn't working on a nuclear bomb program? On what basis do you draw that conclusion?

 

We would be reliant on the US regardless so I don't see your point.

 

The point is you said that we were in the pocket of the Yanks and i inferred from you that you thought that that was a bad thing.

 

I'm saying that you can't demonise the Yanks and complain about being too close or too reliant on them and then expect them to sort out Iran on our behalf becuase they would have nukes and we don't.

 

The USA is more likely to invade us than any of the countries you have mentioned.

 

What are you basing this on? Also who said anything about invading us? No one but you talking is about that.

 

It is about bombing us, not invading us. They don't need to invade us to bomb us.

 

North Korea is on it's knees and the few nukes it does have would struggle to get anywhere near us and the first country they want to go to war is South Korea, again the US wouldnt be likely to stand by if it did attack anyone, they don't like commies with nukes but we'd be pretty far down on it's list of targets, nukes or no nukes. The USA doesn't take NK serious though as it know's NK's on it's knees. The US defences in Europe would shoot their nuke down long before it got anywhere near us even if it could reach us, which is can't.

 

Again you demonise the Yanks on the one hand and us for being too reliant on them, then you expect them to protect us becuase we remove our ultimate deterrent. No one knows the nature of the nuclear bombs these countries have now or are working on, and again i repeat we are talking about security over the next 30 year period not just "now". Who knows how these threats will change over that period or which new threats will present themselves.

 

You really don't think the Yanks take N Korea seriously? Really? Look at the region and the potential neighbours affected. China, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the US.

 

I disagree with you profoundly.

 

That being said it still really doesnt excuse the massive increase in debt the last government left the country and future generations with, which is kind of where we started.

[Albertini]

We'll have to find somewhere else to park our subs soon because Salmond won't have them in an Independent Scotland.

 

He will because it gives them 15,000 quality manufacturing jobs.

 

If he doesn't then they will simply move the fleet and the jobs jobs to Devonport or Portsmouth.

[Anny Road]

He will because it gives them 15,000 quality manufacturing jobs.

 

If he doesn't then they will simply move the fleet and the jobs jobs to Devonport or Portsmouth.

 

Scots will all be busy building windmills and sea turbines.

 

You have some great posts in this thread mate, forlock tugged.

[VladimirIlyich]

When the billions of pounds worth of oil from the south Atlantic starts being tapped it will be considerably more than that.

 

That belongs to the US,like the stuff in Iran,Kuwait and Afghanistan among others.

 

We'd get less oil off the Yanks than the Lib Dems get tickets for the Tory christmas party.