FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
"
Here's Bozo's words
"The overriding purpose of this review… is to make the United Kingdom stronger, safer and more prosperous while standing up for our values," he told the House of Commons.
Please explain how nukes make a country more prosperous?
" Give us a trade deal or we'll nuke you?"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"How can bringing more weapons of mass destruction into the world be a bad move?
Glad you support it.  "
Increased likelihood of the human race being eradicated?
What kind of fool would oppose that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"Oh, and another rule: 'I didn't say what actually I didn't say. I only have said what I have said.
Fucking lol. Have to caveat everything these days.  "
You should have put a caveat with that lol. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
Can we be serious in thinking we can take on China ?
In an arms race they will leave both NATO and the former Warsaw Pact in their wake.
They have a huge amount of cash and a lot of sl4ve labour to call on.
Not sure other than to defend ourselves we would ever use nukes to defend another country! Would we??
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Can we be serious in thinking we can take on China ?
In an arms race they will leave both NATO and the former Warsaw Pact in their wake.
They have a huge amount of cash and a lot of sl4ve labour to call on.
Not sure other than to defend ourselves we would ever use nukes to defend another country! Would we??
"
I don’t see anyone in the world taking on China. They have a certain disregard for their own citizens human rights so I doubt they would give a fuck about anyone else. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Can we be serious in thinking we can take on China ?
In an arms race they will leave both NATO and the former Warsaw Pact in their wake.
They have a huge amount of cash and a lot of sl4ve labour to call on.
Not sure other than to defend ourselves we would ever use nukes to defend another country! Would we??
"
We dont even have a debate about nuclear weapons now it seems .
When Corbyn said he wouldnt press the button, he was lambasted.
Obviously not wanting to see the human race wiped out is a negative for some people. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"
We dont even have a debate about nuclear weapons now it seems .
When Corbyn said he wouldnt press the button, he was lambasted.
Obviously not wanting to see the human race wiped out is a negative for some people."
Pardon? It's called the Integrated Review.
It goes out to lots and pots and pots and lots of Departments for review . . . they talk a lot about it in the commons and in the Lords - even Queenie has a look at it too.
Beyond that nobody talks about it at all.
Learn how your Parliament works. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)"
Funny that others don't think that
"defined by its membership of the European Union and its relationship with the United States.
It was often seen as a bridge between the two.
But Brexit changed all that. So now the government is looking for Britain to play a new global role." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Firstly I believe in that we need a nuclear deterant.
Deterant is what it is for.
Also if someone was to launch a nuclear attack on the UK and we are all doomed, you can bet your last penny I will be shouting bomb the bast**ds at the top of my voice.!
As for the integrated review I read it as not buying more nuclear warheads but reversing a previous reduction of numbers.
Just like to point out something as well.
In a Vanguard Nuclear Submarine there is 16 launch tubes. Some may make the assumption that means 16 nuclear warheads.
That is wrong, inside each rocket/missile there are multiple nuclear warheads. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
Funny that others don't think that
"defined by its membership of the European Union and its relationship with the United States.
It was often seen as a bridge between the two.
But Brexit changed all that. So now the government is looking for Britain to play a new global role.""
We have been playing that role for a very long time. Nato for example.
If we need to update our response post brexit then so be it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
Funny that others don't think that
"defined by its membership of the European Union and its relationship with the United States.
It was often seen as a bridge between the two.
But Brexit changed all that. So now the government is looking for Britain to play a new global role."
We have been playing that role for a very long time. Nato for example.
If we need to update our response post brexit then so be it."
Well brexit has emasculated the UK soft power, so if we want to indulge in international pissing contests we have to make it look like we have credibility. And I'm sure threatening people with nukes will achieve that. Not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
Funny that others don't think that
"defined by its membership of the European Union and its relationship with the United States.
It was often seen as a bridge between the two.
But Brexit changed all that. So now the government is looking for Britain to play a new global role."
We have been playing that role for a very long time. Nato for example.
If we need to update our response post brexit then so be it.
Well brexit has emasculated the UK soft power, so if we want to indulge in international pissing contests we have to make it look like we have credibility. And I'm sure threatening people with nukes will achieve that. Not."
which country have we threatened to nuke ???? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
Funny that others don't think that
"defined by its membership of the European Union and its relationship with the United States.
It was often seen as a bridge between the two.
But Brexit changed all that. So now the government is looking for Britain to play a new global role."
We have been playing that role for a very long time. Nato for example.
If we need to update our response post brexit then so be it.
Well brexit has emasculated the UK soft power, so if we want to indulge in international pissing contests we have to make it look like we have credibility. And I'm sure threatening people with nukes will achieve that. Not."
So would you say France is threatening people with their four newer neclear submarines? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
Funny that others don't think that
"defined by its membership of the European Union and its relationship with the United States.
It was often seen as a bridge between the two.
But Brexit changed all that. So now the government is looking for Britain to play a new global role."
We have been playing that role for a very long time. Nato for example.
If we need to update our response post brexit then so be it.
Well brexit has emasculated the UK soft power, so if we want to indulge in international pissing contests we have to make it look like we have credibility. And I'm sure threatening people with nukes will achieve that. Not.which country have we threatened to nuke ????"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
Funny that others don't think that
"defined by its membership of the European Union and its relationship with the United States.
It was often seen as a bridge between the two.
But Brexit changed all that. So now the government is looking for Britain to play a new global role."
We have been playing that role for a very long time. Nato for example.
If we need to update our response post brexit then so be it."
But the inference that we were going to play a role in the Far East changes the accepted norm and is a completely different approach. Not sure our armed forces can be stretched much more so tech is the battleground. Nukes are a distraction.
My view is India needs to step up.
If no changes and it’s a non story so why is it being announced today? What bad news is being hidden?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.  "
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"Can we be serious in thinking we can take on China ?
In an arms race they will leave both NATO and the former Warsaw Pact in their wake.
They have a huge amount of cash and a lot of sl4ve labour to call on.
Not sure other than to defend ourselves we would ever use nukes to defend another country! Would we??
"
You only need enough to deter an attack, everyone knows that there is no winner in a world scale nuclear war |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button."
so we arnt threatening people with nukes then thought so |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button."
If you bothered to look up the protocol for cobra meetings you would understand their is no rule that says the PM has to attend. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.
If you bothered to look up the protocol for cobra meetings you would understand their is no rule that says the PM has to attend."
Brilliant, so because there is no rule then it’s ok for the Prime Minister to miss such important meetings? Do you know why he wasn’t there? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.so we arnt threatening people with nukes then thought so "
Apparently the biggest threat to UK security comes from Russia, they have 6,372 nuclear war heads, we will have 260, I bet Putin is shitting himself |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.so we arnt threatening people with nukes then thought so
Apparently the biggest threat to UK security comes from Russia, they have 6,372 nuclear war heads, we will have 260, I bet Putin is shitting himself "
how many does it take like are you saying we need more ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.so we arnt threatening people with nukes then thought so
Apparently the biggest threat to UK security comes from Russia, they have 6,372 nuclear war heads, we will have 260, I bet Putin is shitting himself how many does it take like are you saying we need more ?"
I am saying that having another 80 doesn’t make much difference apart from the huge cost |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.so we arnt threatening people with nukes then thought so
Apparently the biggest threat to UK security comes from Russia, they have 6,372 nuclear war heads, we will have 260, I bet Putin is shitting himself how many does it take like are you saying we need more ?
I am saying that having another 80 doesn’t make much difference apart from the huge cost "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I’d of thought half dozen was enough lol
Now now you need more then 6 just in case other countries join in the mayhem. no we don’t that’s what yous are for lol the USA "
Lol I don't want to spend more on defense either.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was only saying to my Girlfriend the other day that we should have another global crisis as soon as the current ones over.
And what’s better than another Cold War or Cuban missile crisis 2.0?
"
Well china just became the number 1 navy. How is your mandarin  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I was only saying to my Girlfriend the other day that we should have another global crisis as soon as the current ones over.
And what’s better than another Cold War or Cuban missile crisis 2.0?
Well china just became the number 1 navy. How is your mandarin "
Not enough to say don’t shoot I’m not English. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was only saying to my Girlfriend the other day that we should have another global crisis as soon as the current ones over.
And what’s better than another Cold War or Cuban missile crisis 2.0?
Well china just became the number 1 navy. How is your mandarin
Not enough to say don’t shoot I’m not English. "
Google translator |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.
If you bothered to look up the protocol for cobra meetings you would understand their is no rule that says the PM has to attend.
Brilliant, so because there is no rule then it’s ok for the Prime Minister to miss such important meetings? Do you know why he wasn’t there? "
In case you missed the first time because there is no rule that says the PM has to be there.
However, as we are referring to the beginning of the pandemic I would guess as nobody knew how bad the situation was going to become a high ranking minister attended the fist meetings. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.
If you bothered to look up the protocol for cobra meetings you would understand their is no rule that says the PM has to attend.
Brilliant, so because there is no rule then it’s ok for the Prime Minister to miss such important meetings? Do you know why he wasn’t there?
In case you missed the first time because there is no rule that says the PM has to be there.
However, as we are referring to the beginning of the pandemic I would guess as nobody knew how bad the situation was going to become a high ranking minister attended the fist meetings. "
He missed 5 meetings, do you know where he was instead ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.so we arnt threatening people with nukes then thought so
Apparently the biggest threat to UK security comes from Russia, they have 6,372 nuclear war heads, we will have 260, I bet Putin is shitting himself "
Our 260 will be more than enough.
260 or 2,260 or 22,660, any of the amounts would remove the targeted country from the Earth for a couple of hundred years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.
If you bothered to look up the protocol for cobra meetings you would understand their is no rule that says the PM has to attend.
Brilliant, so because there is no rule then it’s ok for the Prime Minister to miss such important meetings? Do you know why he wasn’t there?
In case you missed the first time because there is no rule that says the PM has to be there.
However, as we are referring to the beginning of the pandemic I would guess as nobody knew how bad the situation was going to become a high ranking minister attended the fist meetings.
He missed 5 meetings, do you know where he was instead ? "
https://email.number10.gov.uk/
Why don't you ask him yourself. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.
If you bothered to look up the protocol for cobra meetings you would understand their is no rule that says the PM has to attend.
Brilliant, so because there is no rule then it’s ok for the Prime Minister to miss such important meetings? Do you know why he wasn’t there?
In case you missed the first time because there is no rule that says the PM has to be there.
However, as we are referring to the beginning of the pandemic I would guess as nobody knew how bad the situation was going to become a high ranking minister attended the fist meetings.
He missed 5 meetings, do you know where he was instead ?
https://email.number10.gov.uk/
Why don't you ask him yourself."
I don’t need to , I know where he was, he was sat on his fat idle arse at chequers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A REMINDER OF THE OP.
Doesn't make me feel happier but it makes sense . . .
https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
Funny that others don't think that
"defined by its membership of the European Union and its relationship with the United States.
It was often seen as a bridge between the two.
But Brexit changed all that. So now the government is looking for Britain to play a new global role."
We have been playing that role for a very long time. Nato for example.
If we need to update our response post brexit then so be it.
Well brexit has emasculated the UK soft power, so if we want to indulge in international pissing contests we have to make it look like we have credibility. And I'm sure threatening people with nukes will achieve that. Not."
Nope we are riding to new heights of soft power and reclaiming our rightful place in the world order |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What scenario would need to unfold, that would warrant a foreign power from launching nuclear warheads at the UK, or any NATO member, if NATO held no nuclear weapons?"
Do we really need NATO with all the nuke capable countries in NATO? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
Just read this horrific fact on how well supported our defence forces are.
From the Parliamentary defence committee report published two days ago.
This procurement refers to tanks and fighting armoured vehicles.
“We are astonished that between 1997 and late 2020 (with the exception of a small number of armoured engineering and Viking protected mobility vehicles) the Department had not delivered a single new armoured vehicle from the core procurement program into operational service with the Army.”
“Were the British Army to have to fight a peer adversary — a euphemism for Russia — in Eastern Europe in the next few years, whilst our soldiers undoubtedly remain amongst the finest in the world, they would, disgracefully, be forced to go into battle in a combination of obsolescent or even obsolete armoured vehicles, most of them at least 30 years old or more, with poor mechanical reliability, very heavily outgunned by more modern missile and artillery systems and chronically lacking in adequate air defense,” the committee said.
So at least 23 years since a new armoured fighting vehicle delivered. I know we like to sit at the table of the UN Security Council but does having a few extra warheads really make that much difference when we’re prepared to send our soldiers out in old tanks? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just read this horrific fact on how well supported our defence forces are.
From the Parliamentary defence committee report published two days ago.
This procurement refers to tanks and fighting armoured vehicles.
“We are astonished that between 1997 and late 2020 (with the exception of a small number of armoured engineering and Viking protected mobility vehicles) the Department had not delivered a single new armoured vehicle from the core procurement program into operational service with the Army.”
“Were the British Army to have to fight a peer adversary — a euphemism for Russia — in Eastern Europe in the next few years, whilst our soldiers undoubtedly remain amongst the finest in the world, they would, disgracefully, be forced to go into battle in a combination of obsolescent or even obsolete armoured vehicles, most of them at least 30 years old or more, with poor mechanical reliability, very heavily outgunned by more modern missile and artillery systems and chronically lacking in adequate air defense,” the committee said.
So at least 23 years since a new armoured fighting vehicle delivered. I know we like to sit at the table of the UN Security Council but does having a few extra warheads really make that much difference when we’re prepared to send our soldiers out in old tanks? "
I agree with you, it doesn't read well.
However I thought the idea of having Apache attack helicopters was to counter the need for having large amounys of armoured vehicles.
They can take their targets out from a long distance without being seen,
and are nicknamed flying tanks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Just read this horrific fact on how well supported our defence forces are.
From the Parliamentary defence committee report published two days ago.
This procurement refers to tanks and fighting armoured vehicles.
“We are astonished that between 1997 and late 2020 (with the exception of a small number of armoured engineering and Viking protected mobility vehicles) the Department had not delivered a single new armoured vehicle from the core procurement program into operational service with the Army.”
“Were the British Army to have to fight a peer adversary — a euphemism for Russia — in Eastern Europe in the next few years, whilst our soldiers undoubtedly remain amongst the finest in the world, they would, disgracefully, be forced to go into battle in a combination of obsolescent or even obsolete armoured vehicles, most of them at least 30 years old or more, with poor mechanical reliability, very heavily outgunned by more modern missile and artillery systems and chronically lacking in adequate air defense,” the committee said.
So at least 23 years since a new armoured fighting vehicle delivered. I know we like to sit at the table of the UN Security Council but does having a few extra warheads really make that much difference when we’re prepared to send our soldiers out in old tanks?
I agree with you, it doesn't read well.
However I thought the idea of having Apache attack helicopters was to counter the need for having large amounys of armoured vehicles.
They can take their targets out from a long distance without being seen,
and are nicknamed flying tanks."
I agree but they are vulnerable to ground missiles and a good tank can take a few hits. An Apache maybe. I don’t know enough about the cons and benefits to know best I just thought if we’re going to have equipment surely it should be up to date not 30 to 40 years old. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"Just read this horrific fact on how well supported our defence forces are.
From the Parliamentary defence committee report published two days ago.
This procurement refers to tanks and fighting armoured vehicles.
“We are astonished that between 1997 and late 2020 (with the exception of a small number of armoured engineering and Viking protected mobility vehicles) the Department had not delivered a single new armoured vehicle from the core procurement program into operational service with the Army.”
“Were the British Army to have to fight a peer adversary — a euphemism for Russia — in Eastern Europe in the next few years, whilst our soldiers undoubtedly remain amongst the finest in the world, they would, disgracefully, be forced to go into battle in a combination of obsolescent or even obsolete armoured vehicles, most of them at least 30 years old or more, with poor mechanical reliability, very heavily outgunned by more modern missile and artillery systems and chronically lacking in adequate air defense,” the committee said.
So at least 23 years since a new armoured fighting vehicle delivered. I know we like to sit at the table of the UN Security Council but does having a few extra warheads really make that much difference when we’re prepared to send our soldiers out in old tanks? "
This kind of stuff really grates with anyone who has studied recent history. Government complacency and an unwarranted belief that “British Exceptionalism” will see us through has resulted in a catalogue of British Military failures brought about wholly by the Government of the time’s ineptitude.
The annihilation of the BEF in 1940 and the resulting Dunkirk retreat has never been properly rationalised in this country. Suez too has been all but erased from history and had it not been for exceptional military decision making (and a fuck load of luck) The Falkland Island campaign could very easily have toppled Thatcher.
We seem to have a political history of not really getting the military reality of the world and where we sit strategically. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just read this horrific fact on how well supported our defence forces are.
From the Parliamentary defence committee report published two days ago.
This procurement refers to tanks and fighting armoured vehicles.
“We are astonished that between 1997 and late 2020 (with the exception of a small number of armoured engineering and Viking protected mobility vehicles) the Department had not delivered a single new armoured vehicle from the core procurement program into operational service with the Army.”
“Were the British Army to have to fight a peer adversary — a euphemism for Russia — in Eastern Europe in the next few years, whilst our soldiers undoubtedly remain amongst the finest in the world, they would, disgracefully, be forced to go into battle in a combination of obsolescent or even obsolete armoured vehicles, most of them at least 30 years old or more, with poor mechanical reliability, very heavily outgunned by more modern missile and artillery systems and chronically lacking in adequate air defense,” the committee said.
So at least 23 years since a new armoured fighting vehicle delivered. I know we like to sit at the table of the UN Security Council but does having a few extra warheads really make that much difference when we’re prepared to send our soldiers out in old tanks? "
As a veteran I feel for the troops they should not field sub par equipment. Everyone screams when a deterrence not necessary but the ones screaming are the ones that have not experienced the horror what that said equipment can provide with safety. It's a losing battle at this point. Why even bothers serving your country. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering. "
Top table? France have more than we do |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do "
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes. "
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000"
Just as long as we have enough to make a difference |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000Just as long as we have enough to make a difference "
1 will make a difference |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000"
Most Ruskie nukes are ground based easy to take out so they are off the board for strategic purposes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes. "
France
The French Navy includes a nuclear strategic branch, the Force Océanique Stratégique, which has contained as many as 5 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines.
6 Redoutable class submarines, armed with 16 M4 IRBMs entered service between 1971 and 1985. The last of these, the L'Inflexible (S 615), was retired from service in 2008.
1 Le Terrible (S 619) commissioned in 2010, armed with 16 of the more modern M51 missile, successfully tested in 2010.[9]
3 Triomphant-class SSBNs: the Le Triomphant (S 616), the Le Téméraire (S 617), the Le Vigilant (S 618), armed with 16 of the less modern M45 missile. They will be upgraded to the new M51 missile by 2018, Le Vigilant will be the first to be upgraded, starting in 2011.[9]
The Armée de l'air et de l'espace has 75 ASMP medium-range air-to-ground missiles with nuclear warheads at its disposal,[10] of which:
M51 Missile carries 6 to 10 warheads
UK
120 warheads (2019)
Still think they have less than the uk? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000
Most Ruskie nukes are ground based easy to take out so they are off the board for strategic purposes. "
That isn’t true, I have spoken to professors about this, they say your making things up again |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000
Most Ruskie nukes are ground based easy to take out so they are off the board for strategic purposes. "
Yes because spotting a target the size of a combine harvester in 17,125,191 square kilometres (6,612,073 sq mi)is a doddle..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just read this horrific fact on how well supported our defence forces are.
From the Parliamentary defence committee report published two days ago.
This procurement refers to tanks and fighting armoured vehicles.
“We are astonished that between 1997 and late 2020 (with the exception of a small number of armoured engineering and Viking protected mobility vehicles) the Department had not delivered a single new armoured vehicle from the core procurement program into operational service with the Army.”
“Were the British Army to have to fight a peer adversary — a euphemism for Russia — in Eastern Europe in the next few years, whilst our soldiers undoubtedly remain amongst the finest in the world, they would, disgracefully, be forced to go into battle in a combination of obsolescent or even obsolete armoured vehicles, most of them at least 30 years old or more, with poor mechanical reliability, very heavily outgunned by more modern missile and artillery systems and chronically lacking in adequate air defense,” the committee said.
So at least 23 years since a new armoured fighting vehicle delivered. I know we like to sit at the table of the UN Security Council but does having a few extra warheads really make that much difference when we’re prepared to send our soldiers out in old tanks?
As a veteran I feel for the troops they should not field sub par equipment."
Are you saying the QM's dept has run out of black masking tape?
Run for the hills, we're all doomed doomed i tell ya. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000
Most Ruskie nukes are ground based easy to take out so they are off the board for strategic purposes.
That isn’t true, I have spoken to professors about this, they say your making things up again "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
We’re not told how many warheads are in each trident missile but given there's only ever one submarine at sea it limits our number readily available.
So absolute total isn’t the point. It’s what’s deliverable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000
Most Ruskie nukes are ground based easy to take out so they are off the board for strategic purposes.
That isn’t true, I have spoken to professors about this, they say your making things up again "
It only has 15 SSBN subs so maybe 800 warheads total |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000
Most Ruskie nukes are ground based easy to take out so they are off the board for strategic purposes.
Yes because spotting a target the size of a combine harvester in 17,125,191 square kilometres (6,612,073 sq mi)is a doddle....."
I have access to information on that sort of thing that they don't give to civilians |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
The United Kingdom is estimated to possess 195 nuclear weapons, of which 120 are operationally available and only 40 are deployed at a time. All of the deployed warheads are controlled by the Royal Navy, which maintains a continuous at-sea presence via its 4 Vanguard-class nuclear-powered submarines. This posture ensures a secure second-strike capability in the event of a nuclear attack. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000
Most Ruskie nukes are ground based easy to take out so they are off the board for strategic purposes.
Yes because spotting a target the size of a combine harvester in 17,125,191 square kilometres (6,612,073 sq mi)is a doddle.....
I have access to information on that sort of thing that they don't give to civilians "
of course you do |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More nukes is always good, keeps us at the top table.
But we dont half get ripped off by the cost, shouldn't be that expensive. Lack of competitive tendering.
Top table? France have more than we do
Operational? Doubt it.
But I want more, yes.
Who cares how many nukes we have when Russia have over 6,000
Most Ruskie nukes are ground based easy to take out so they are off the board for strategic purposes.
Yes because spotting a target the size of a combine harvester in 17,125,191 square kilometres (6,612,073 sq mi)is a doddle.....
I have access to information on that sort of thing that they don't give to civilians
of course you do "
Can't say any more |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Our government isn't spending that money for a laugh, they are doing it to protect our county and our way of life. Do you think these countries that don't hold our values are scared of war? They live in war zones, we don't. If we were not protected we wouldn't be as lucky as we are now. Boris has a lot on his plate, it takes a strong individual to take responsibility for every decision all of the time for an entire country. Well done to him and just taking on the job when a global pandemic hits. On a personal level I have seen people losing their shit over trivial things, this year and last has taking its toll and people the world over are irritable. Boris is right to make an irritable country think twice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Our government isn't spending that money for a laugh, they are doing it to protect our county and our way of life. Do you think these countries that don't hold our values are scared of war? They live in war zones, we don't. If we were not protected we wouldn't be as lucky as we are now. Boris has a lot on his plate, it takes a strong individual to take responsibility for every decision all of the time for an entire country. Well done to him and just taking on the job when a global pandemic hits. On a personal level I have seen people losing their shit over trivial things, this year and last has taking its toll and people the world over are irritable. Boris is right to make an irritable country think twice. "
BoZo stabbed May in the back to get the job. He then used a blatant lie ("oven ready deal") to get elected. He's complained about his wages. I have zero sympathy for him.
He missed cobra meetings when the pandemic kicked off.
He's now boosting spending on nuclear weapons.
In a conflict with an irritable country, is he going to use nukes? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Our government isn't spending that money for a laugh, they are doing it to protect our county and our way of life. Do you think these countries that don't hold our values are scared of war? They live in war zones, we don't. If we were not protected we wouldn't be as lucky as we are now. Boris has a lot on his plate, it takes a strong individual to take responsibility for every decision all of the time for an entire country. Well done to him and just taking on the job when a global pandemic hits. On a personal level I have seen people losing their shit over trivial things, this year and last has taking its toll and people the world over are irritable. Boris is right to make an irritable country think twice.
BoZo stabbed May in the back to get the job. He then used a blatant lie ("oven ready deal") to get elected. He's complained about his wages. I have zero sympathy for him.
He missed cobra meetings when the pandemic kicked off.
He's now boosting spending on nuclear weapons.
In a conflict with an irritable country, is he going to use nukes?"
Don't understand the question. If an Uppity country attacks us, are we gonna attack back? Is that the question? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"Our government isn't spending that money for a laugh, they are doing it to protect our county and our way of life. Do you think these countries that don't hold our values are scared of war? They live in war zones, we don't. If we were not protected we wouldn't be as lucky as we are now. Boris has a lot on his plate, it takes a strong individual to take responsibility for every decision all of the time for an entire country. Well done to him and just taking on the job when a global pandemic hits. On a personal level I have seen people losing their shit over trivial things, this year and last has taking its toll and people the world over are irritable. Boris is right to make an irritable country think twice.
BoZo stabbed May in the back to get the job. He then used a blatant lie ("oven ready deal") to get elected. He's complained about his wages. I have zero sympathy for him.
He missed cobra meetings when the pandemic kicked off.
He's now boosting spending on nuclear weapons.
In a conflict with an irritable country, is he going to use nukes?
Don't understand the question. If an Uppity country attacks us, are we gonna attack back? Is that the question? "
We already have enough Nukes to obliterate the world 5 times over - what is the need for another 40? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Our government isn't spending that money for a laugh, they are doing it to protect our county and our way of life. Do you think these countries that don't hold our values are scared of war? They live in war zones, we don't. If we were not protected we wouldn't be as lucky as we are now. Boris has a lot on his plate, it takes a strong individual to take responsibility for every decision all of the time for an entire country. Well done to him and just taking on the job when a global pandemic hits. On a personal level I have seen people losing their shit over trivial things, this year and last has taking its toll and people the world over are irritable. Boris is right to make an irritable country think twice.
BoZo stabbed May in the back to get the job. He then used a blatant lie ("oven ready deal") to get elected. He's complained about his wages. I have zero sympathy for him.
He missed cobra meetings when the pandemic kicked off.
He's now boosting spending on nuclear weapons.
In a conflict with an irritable country, is he going to use nukes?
Don't understand the question. If an Uppity country attacks us, are we gonna attack back? Is that the question? "
No it isn't the question.
The is "in a conflict with an irritable country is he going to use nukes?" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Our government isn't spending that money for a laugh, they are doing it to protect our county and our way of life. Do you think these countries that don't hold our values are scared of war? They live in war zones, we don't. If we were not protected we wouldn't be as lucky as we are now. Boris has a lot on his plate, it takes a strong individual to take responsibility for every decision all of the time for an entire country. Well done to him and just taking on the job when a global pandemic hits. On a personal level I have seen people losing their shit over trivial things, this year and last has taking its toll and people the world over are irritable. Boris is right to make an irritable country think twice.
BoZo stabbed May in the back to get the job. He then used a blatant lie ("oven ready deal") to get elected. He's complained about his wages. I have zero sympathy for him.
He missed cobra meetings when the pandemic kicked off.
He's now boosting spending on nuclear weapons.
In a conflict with an irritable country, is he going to use nukes?
Don't understand the question. If an Uppity country attacks us, are we gonna attack back? Is that the question?
We already have enough Nukes to obliterate the world 5 times over - what is the need for another 40?"
We don't, the world may do, we don't. If we have true New Empire ambitions we need to increase the size of our stick. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Our government isn't spending that money for a laugh, they are doing it to protect our county and our way of life. Do you think these countries that don't hold our values are scared of war? They live in war zones, we don't. If we were not protected we wouldn't be as lucky as we are now. Boris has a lot on his plate, it takes a strong individual to take responsibility for every decision all of the time for an entire country. Well done to him and just taking on the job when a global pandemic hits. On a personal level I have seen people losing their shit over trivial things, this year and last has taking its toll and people the world over are irritable. Boris is right to make an irritable country think twice.
BoZo stabbed May in the back to get the job. He then used a blatant lie ("oven ready deal") to get elected. He's complained about his wages. I have zero sympathy for him.
He missed cobra meetings when the pandemic kicked off.
He's now boosting spending on nuclear weapons.
In a conflict with an irritable country, is he going to use nukes?
Don't understand the question. If an Uppity country attacks us, are we gonna attack back? Is that the question?
We already have enough Nukes to obliterate the world 5 times over - what is the need for another 40?
We don't, the world may do, we don't. If we have true New Empire ambitions we need to increase the size of our stick. "
The only one with Empire ambitions is you. And it's a crap joke worn thin. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolution OP Couple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"
No one, yet, but this is BoZo Johnson, if thinks it'll get him good pr I dare say he'd organise a nuke on Birmingham
Adds so much to the conversation.
This is BoZo Johnson remember, a man who couldn't even be bothered to turn up to cobra meetings, who managed to open his big mouth and nearly get an increase in sentence for a British citizen in Iran.
He's a clown. Wouldn't put him in charge of an etch a sketch never mind put his finger on the button.so we arnt threatening people with nukes then thought so
Apparently the biggest threat to UK security comes from Russia, they have 6,372 nuclear war heads, we will have 260, I bet Putin is shitting himself "
That we could launch 260 I think he would get the message however. The first nation to launch just one on any Eastern or Western country assures us all of the end the world for humankind. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Look at the countries where they can't buy food, they need aid from other countries but they all have guns. We are the same just on a bigger scale. So what if we have had to use food banks? It's not a bag of rice thrown from a truck. That's the importance of keeping our country strong. I don't even keep up with world affairs, that's just common sense. The biggest and strongest dominates, that's the nature of the beast. The fact that there are so many people unaware of this, only goes to show what an amazing job our country does. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"https://news.sky.com/story/integrated-review-britain-reverses-planned-reduction-of-nuclear-warheads-as-it-warns-against-threats-from-china-12247574
What say you all?
(the rules of answering is that it's not about covid and Boris's response to covid. It probably is about the role of Europe (and the EU). France has taken a similar stance recently. It's absolutely fluckall to do with Brexit and Heinz baked beans either.)
"
Be better if the money wentvto the NHS etc.. Rsther thsn wasting money on even more wmd's |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
