The labour Leader thread...
- Thread starter easyrider
- Start date
Good job there's been no conflicts since 1939 then.
Combined with other nations it would. Nuclear submarines is all a nation requires in self defense it does not need a standing army at all. Who is going to invade? Russia is the only place with the power and motive and they would never set foot on British soil if they thought a sub would hit Moscow. The Russian population is highly urbanized and nearly all on the European side. A nuclear submarine would be thier worst nightmare as you never know where it lurks or when it can attack. And if built correctly you never know how many a nation has in an underground submarine base.
Why does anyone need more than 9000 professional infantry? Willy waving and wasting money or funneling the profits into certain peoples pockets is what i imagine is happening.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
I've never said I was. I think the only thing I've said I am on this forum is a communist.
Whatever someones else ascribes to me is none of my concern.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 14,179
- Location
- La France
You're one of those people who believe that we've had peace in Western Europe for the last 50 odds years because of the EU, aren't you?
There was once a program to convert them to non explosive solid metal/concrete heads and use the imense speed of reentry to provide the damage kinda like a man made metiorite but it hit issues with flagging up all the nuclear nations attack warnings and potential starting world war 3 when all we wanted to do was smash some Arab leader in his hut
So what happens to your stratagey when effective missile shields are deployed?
Or say argintinia invades the Falklands, you've no conventional force big enough to retake them what you gonna do nuke argintinia and become a political outcast?
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 20,356
- Location
- Stanley Hotel, Colorado
9000 highly trained men would whip the Argies not to mention the raw troops we could muster and train over a month or two. To hell with being a political outcast was America when she bombed Japan?
Since you clearly have no idea of even a basic understanding of the military on the basis of the "all we need is 9k infantry" and no idea of the current state of the military. Have you considered you pulling a number out of your rear may not be a sound basis in which to pursue a national defence policy?
Errr you realise to have 9000 combat troops you'd need a he'll of a lot more than 9000 men right?
As for the raw troops comet that's just silly, you want to cut back the armed forces then use badly trained rushed replacements as cannon fodder if there's a problem?
Yeah not sure you can compare the events of ww2 to randomly nuking a million people off the map these days.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...dyab-abou-jahjah_n_8011502.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
Stories like this do worry me about him, even though it may not be true historically the left of the Labour party have supported Islamic extremisim in the name of 'rubbing the right's nose in diversity'. While Corbyn is clearly the best of a bad lot in the Labour leadership contest, come the general election I may find myself siding with Farage again.
Stories like this do worry me about him, even though it may not be true historically the left of the Labour party have supported Islamic extremisim in the name of 'rubbing the right's nose in diversity'. While Corbyn is clearly the best of a bad lot in the Labour leadership contest, come the general election I may find myself siding with Farage again.
No, but the idea of Pax Europa has been around for awhile, it took several million people to die for the relaxations of nation controls.
It will take a lot more for the rest of the world to agree with, simple human irrationality.
It was his party that lost it for him, he didn't really do anything wrong. To be fair he did increase Labour's seats in England, but the were two big problems:
Problem #1 was that the SNP wiped Labour out in Scotland by basically telling all the Labour voters to vote SNP and they would put Ed in power and squeeze some nice Scottish concessions out of him, no sane Scottish Labour supporter wouldn't go for that when it appeared guaranteed that the Tories couldn't get a majority.
Problem #2 was that for five years the media attacked him, his character, his intelligence, his looks, etc and Labour did nothing to counter. Even in the run up to the election top Labour MP's were adamant that they just needed to show people "the real Ed" and they would see the media was wrong and he was PM worthy and a great guy, and they were right, sadly they failed spectacularly to do it. The people never got to see the "real Ed" until he sat down for a (very good) interview with Russell Brand that hardly anyone watched.
He also voted with the Conservatives 263 times between 1997-2010
No it would be many times worse, the only thing holding back ISIS is Assad, if we had backed up the rebels and toppled Assad like we did Gaddafi then ISIS would have simply rolled over the new government and be running Syria themselves now.
Thats good because we dont have it. Iran has 13 million in its 'standing army', thats large
Prior to Desert Storm, Iraq had the third largest army on the planet, how'd that work out for them?
Prior to Desert Storm, Iraq had the third largest army on the planet, how'd that work out for them?
Weren't lots of them conscripted though?
