March in London on the 26th?

[Slam62]

Dolph was educated at Parkside Community College, and now has a suitably prestigious job with Plymouth City Council. He votes UKIP when nobody is looking.

Anarchy is demonstrably not a left-wing position; it resides at the extreme end of the libertarian philosophy to which Dolph himself subscribes.

I don't thinks that's right

 

[Slam62]

Well said. Trident is good money well spent.

aren't you Australian?

trident is a waste of money.

 

[uk_unbeliever]

Correct. And more people voted for them knowing that then any other party.

You disagree? Well good for you, that's democracy.

Or, you could look at it that 52% (Lab / Lib Dem share of the seats) of the population voted for parties who (during the election campaign at least) generally agreed that cuts should be less severe and over a longer period.

Regardless of thoughts on what should happen now and what was or was not known by the opposition at the time, at the point of the election the majority of the country did not vote for the current policies.
So the argument of democracy is a little hollow.

 

[dirtydog]

Was in London this weekend and shopping on regent st right when the so called "black bloc" broke off from the main parade with the giant horse. When I get chance I'll upload a few photos and videos of all the idiots causing trouble.

In my opinion I think the police did a great job despite the strategies from the top being questionable. Talking to some of them it sounded like a tiring long day for them all.

Question: is gas not allowed in crowd control anymore. If it were down to me that would have been my choice. Gas the lot and watch em drop.

Gas them - yes this gets my vote

 

[Slam62]

so the lib dems and cons tell the truth when in opposition do they, come on they all fib like mad to get your vote.

 

[Slam62]

Gas them - yes this gets my vote

are you Hitlers long lost son?

 

[scorza]

Trident represents a tiny percentage of our budget deficit anyway so in the grand scheme of things it doesn't make much difference.

Everything that has been cut represents a tiny percentage of our budget deficit. It's a question of priorities.

Because the exchange rate is all in your favour and the MOD doesn't offer free delivery.

Australia has a long history of opposition to nuclear power in any form. Even our most conservative governments have not been prepared to defy the public sentiment on this issue. This is a matter of ideology and realpolitik. It does not reflect upon the military effectiveness of Trident.

In any case, now that the Yanks have a couple of military bases over here, we might as well let them do all the legwork.

And yet Australia is one of the world's largest exporters of uranium. What's good for the goose is not good for the gander eh?

I don't doubt Trident's military effectiveness, but it would appear to be a "nice-to-have" which the UK can no longer afford. It's a cold-war weapon with very limited value for current conflicts - I'd rather have helicopters and aircraft carriers with some aircraft.

 

[Al Vallario]

Anarchists take any oppoptunity to create disruption. The rest was your usual attempt to denigrate the union movement at any opportunity.

There are many anarchist schools of thought (anarchist pacifism, philosophical anarchism, etc.) that advocate change but specifically reject violence as a means of achieving it.

In fact, there are many who would argue that violence is entirely contrary to anarchist principles.

 

[avec]

I don't doubt Trident's military effectiveness, but it would appear to be a "nice-to-have" which the UK can no longer afford. It's a cold-war weapon with very limited value for current conflicts - I'd rather have helicopters and aircraft carriers with some aircraft.

Well Labour screwed up the aircraft carriers too didn't they. Diesel powered aircraft carriers, truly laughable.

Nuclear weapons always have value, their main value is in never having a reason to use them. We can afford to keep them, because they are more important than pointless public sector workers who do nothing useful for the country.

You'll all scream for nuclear weapons in the future if our country is ever threatened with invasion or any other kind of direct war.

None of the 'wars' we are involved in recently have gone anywhere near our shores, we may have our army deployed in anger but you'd not know it since we're all living in happy peacetime here.

Just because none of these recent wars have affected us directly doesn't mean that others wont. Think of nuclear weapons as an investment in our future.

I think Gordon Brown wasted more money on selling our gold off at the worst possible time than Trident will cost in many years.

 

[RoboCod]

Gas them - yes this gets my vote

But seriously though, a lung full of cs gas and no one would be putting their foot through santanders door. Instead they'd be rolling around on the floor crying for their human rights.

 

[Naffa]

I don't doubt Trident's military effectiveness, but it would appear to be a "nice-to-have" which the UK can no longer afford. It's a cold-war weapon with very limited value for current conflicts - I'd rather have helicopters and aircraft carriers with some aircraft.

I don't think that it's that we can no longer afford it, it's just not necessary. Pre-1991 I would probably have been convinced by the realist school of thought, but now... Especially with the state of the global economy, there is just no point in having a nuclear deterrent.

 

[Castiel]

I don't think that it's that we can no longer afford it, it's just not necessary. Pre-1991 I would probably have been convinced by the realist school of thought, but now... Especially with the state of the global economy, there is just no point in having a nuclear deterrent.

Tony Blair used to be a member of CND, yet even he could see the need for a Nuclear Deterent, not just for protection, but also for the political clout it affords us.

It isn't actually all that expensive to maintain and unless there is significant multilateral disarmament then merely the ownership of such weapons being known at the negotiating table warrants there existence as part of our arsenal.

 

[dirtydog]

I don't think that it's that we can no longer afford it, it's just not necessary. Pre-1991 I would probably have been convinced by the realist school of thought, but now... Especially with the state of the global economy, there is just no point in having a nuclear deterrent.

We don't know what the future holds. Having nukes and other people knowing we have nukes, means that any country thinking of attacking us, knows they will be hit back hard. Weak countries get attacked. We can't assume that our NATO allies will always have our backs, or even that NATO will always exist.

 

[dirtydog]

The cost of Trident is a red herring when talking about the budget deficit anyway as it is a few billion a year IIRC, versus a budget deficit of around £150bn a year.

 

[Yas786]

are you Hitlers long lost son?

PMSL

Well with his immigration stance, he may very well be...joking

 

[scorza]

Well Labour screwed up the aircraft carriers too didn't they. Diesel powered aircraft carriers, truly laughable.

I thought the common wisdom on here was that Labour mucked up by profligate spending, not by going for cheaper options

Nuclear weapons always have value, their main value is in never having a reason to use them. We can afford to keep them, because they are more important than pointless public sector workers who do nothing useful for the country.

You'll all scream for nuclear weapons in the future if our country is ever threatened with invasion or any other kind of direct war.

None of the 'wars' we are involved in recently have gone anywhere near our shores, we may have our army deployed in anger but you'd not know it since we're all living in happy peacetime here.

Just because none of these recent wars have affected us directly doesn't mean that others wont. Think of nuclear weapons as an investment in our future.

I prefer to spend the defence budget on current threats rather than potential non-existent enemies.

In case you're not aware the current Trident system will need replacing or extending in the next decade, both options cost a lot of money though extending is cheaper and what the US have decided to do. Scrapping Trident altogether is the cheapest option and does not mean giving up our nuclear deterrent - there are other, cheaper ways of delivering a nuke although Trident is the best.

I think Gordon Brown wasted more money on selling our gold off at the worst possible time than Trident will cost in many years.

The gold sell off "cost" the country £2bn, replacing Trident will cost £20-30bn I think, probably more like £40-50bn by the time it actually comes online.

 

[Naffa]

I agree, I made the point of saying that my distaste for it wasn't based on economic reasons, they merely added fuel to the fire. I just cannot see the point of them existing in the post-cold war world. As you rightly say, we don't know what's coming around the corner, but I would feel a lot safer if we didn't possess the means to so easily destroy ourselves, something we seem to be working harder to do everyday.

 

[dirtydog]

I agree, I made the point of saying that my distaste for it wasn't based on economic reasons, they merely added fuel to the fire. I just cannot see the point of them existing in the post-cold war world. As you rightly say, we don't know what's coming around the corner, but I would feel a lot safer if we didn't possess the means to so easily destroy ourselves, something we seem to be working harder to do everyday.

Nuclear weapons are horrible, I agree. I don't like them at all, they make my blood run cold. But we can't un-invent them. I wish we could. Given that we can't, if we give up ours, someone else will have them and then they have enormous power over us.

 

[Naffa]

I am most certainly a multilateral disarmer, if I gave the impression of being otherwise then I was mistaken. When I said that it was pointless renewing Trident, I didn't mean to imply that we shouldn't (if that makes any sense ). I am absolutely not a unilateral disarmer.

It's just with countries like Iran pursuing nuclear weapons, I get ever more nervous about it.

Also, I'm not one of these lefties that says the United States and the United Kingdom are the two biggest rogues states in the world, a la George Galloway and company.

 

[Castiel]

Nuclear weapons are horrible, I agree. I don't like them at all, they make my blood run cold. But we can't un-invent them. I wish we could. Given that we can't, if we give up ours, someone else will have them and then they have enormous power over us.

I quite agree. I watched Threads again the other day, I think that should be required viewing for every world leader when they take power.




btw: when is the real DD coming back.....all this agreement with you is freaking me out...