Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Chris Hugne, Lib Dem leadership candidate, siad that he doesnt want to renew Trident because we no longer face a threat from the Soviet Union.

    Do you think Britain should renew Trident?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nightowl)
    Chris Hugne, Lib Dem leadership candidate, siad that he doesnt want to renew Trident because we no longer face a threat from the Soviet Union.

    Do you think Britain should renew Trident?
    No Soviet Union, just North Korea, Iran and anyone else who feels like it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No, i do not think Britain should renew its weapons. However, even though i don't like to admit it, we still do need them, otherwise we leave our country open to attack from those who do have them, because everyone mite not share the "peace and freedom" philosophy which comes with disarming.
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    Renew.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Golden Maverick)
    No Soviet Union, just North Korea, Iran and anyone else who feels like it.
    This shows how well the media works in favour of the Bush/Blair administration.

    Iran is NOT a threat to the US or UK, and probably never will be. They lack the technology to fire missile distances greater than the length to Israel, let alone the materials to make a SINGLE atomic bomb. It would take them at least a year to make a bomb, and even then, the only country that faces a threat is Israel....

    Before ANY of you start saying Iran is dangerous, just remember back to 2002/2003 when the Bush administration was 100% sure Saddam had WMD's, tonnes of Anthrax and biological agents, nuclear bomb building materials, weapons trailers etc.....ALL cleverly manipulated evidence to fit the cause, but was infact totally bogus

    Bush/Blair are going to make the case for action against Iran soon, and unless people stand up against it, it will be the end of America.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stranksy)
    This shows how well the media works in favour of the Bush/Blair administration.

    Iran is NOT a threat to the US or UK, and probably never will be. They lack the technology to fire missile distances greater than the length to Israel, let alone the materials to make a SINGLE atomic bomb. It would take them at least a year to make a bomb, and even then, the only country that faces a threat is Israel....

    Before ANY of you start saying Iran is dangerous, just remember back to 2002/2003 when the Bush administration was 100% sure Saddam had WMD's, tonnes of Anthrax and biological agents, nuclear bomb building materials, weapons trailers etc.....ALL cleverly manipulated evidence to fit the cause, but was infact totally bogus

    Bush/Blair are going to make the case for action against Iran soon, and unless people stand up against it, it will be the end of America.
    A nuke going off in the middle east could damage our energy supply and our environment.

    Also, just because they don't have the ability to fire weapons over a very long distance now doesn't mean they won't be able to in the future. We couldn't 40 years ago.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stranksy)
    This shows how well the media works in favour of the Bush/Blair administration..
    Yes, so well that 98% of their reporting regarding Iraq is negative.

    Source: Google News Index.

    Iran is NOT a threat to the US or UK, and probably never will be.
    It is a threat to national interest and it is a threat to stability that we wish to see maintained. Im reassured by your confident assertion that Iran will 'probably never' be a threat.

    They lack the technology to fire missile distances greater than the length to Israel, let alone the materials to make a SINGLE atomic bomb. It would take them at least a year to make a bomb, and even then, the only country that faces a threat is Israel....
    Which we, as responsible member's of the UNSC would be attempting to prevent.

    Before ANY of you start saying Iran is dangerous, just remember back to 2002/2003 when the Bush administration was 100% sure Saddam had WMD's, tonnes of Anthrax and biological agents, nuclear bomb building materials, weapons trailers etc.....ALL cleverly manipulated evidence to fit the cause, but was infact totally bogus
    So bogus the CIA, UNSCOM, the French, the British and the Clinton administration all thought the same thing.

    Bush/Blair are going to make the case for action against Iran soon, and unless people stand up against it, it will be the end of America.
    Dream on.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    A nuke going off in the middle east could damage our energy supply
    Blood-for-oil!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nightowl)
    Chris Hugne, Lib Dem leadership candidate, siad that he doesnt want to renew Trident because we no longer face a threat from the Soviet Union.
    The Lib Dems would have disarmed the British Armed Forces after WW2 because we no longer faced a threat from Nazi Germany.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Of course we should renew.

    If any two bit dictator wants to threaten us, he'd know we have a sufficient supply of nukes to worry him. It's vital to protect our sovereignty.

    I think we should increase our nuclear arsenal (to about 1000-2000 warheads) and cease this agreement in which we get permission from the Americans to launch OUR weapons. We are a sovereign country, after all.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    It is a threat to national interest and it is a threat to stability that we wish to see maintained. Im reassured by your confident assertion that Iran will 'probably never' be a threat.
    You mean, its a threat to your way of life? This is part of the problem also. We live in luxury societies which we take for granted, when infact all this materialism is useless and only enslaves us further.

    And "Nation Interest"? What kind of politic ******** phrase is that!? Anything could be of "interest".

    The only threat Iran posess is to Americas economy, nothing more. And you can say "dream on" all you like, but the time is very close, when i'll be able to say "i told you so".
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zooropa)
    Of course we should renew.

    If any two bit dictator wants to threaten us, he'd know we have a sufficient supply of nukes to worry him. It's vital to protect our sovereignty.

    I think we should increase our nuclear arsenal (to about 1000-2000 warheads) and cease this agreement in which we get permission from the Americans to launch OUR weapons. We are a sovereign country, after all.
    I thought there was an agreement that we didn't need their permission? Of course this doesn't mean much seeing as we use their missiles and guidance system.

    To Stransky, I think your points have already been dealt with effectively by others. But I might add that nuclear war is not good for anyone, however uninvolved they may be. By preventing less stable nations from having nuclear weapons we reduce the chance of nuclear war.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    We should renew them. Just because there isn't any sort of Cold War situation at the moment doesn't mean there won't be one in 10 or 20 years time, and we do face threats from various dangerous states that could be building nuclear weapons.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stranksy)
    You mean, its a threat to your way of life? This is part of the problem also. We live in luxury societies which we take for granted, when infact all this materialism is useless and only enslaves us further.
    Let me guess, you live in the trees?

    And "Nation Interest"? What kind of politic ******** phrase is that!?
    You'd have to believe in nation states to comprehend national interest.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zooropa)
    I think we should increase our nuclear arsenal (to about 1000-2000 warheads) and cease this agreement in which we get permission from the Americans to launch OUR weapons. We are a sovereign country, after all.
    That would be a sovereign country minus the military capability as supplied by the US, which wouldnt be particularly useful when it came to defending that sovereignity. Alternatively, we could cease integration with the ERRF, which denies us sovereignity and paralyses us further.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Regardless of the intrinsic drawbacks and benefits of nuclear weapons in themselves, the UK is militarily so dependent on the USA there's no point in having them - as has been mentioned, the technology comes from the US and even if it didn't, there's no way the UK would use them independently anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Let me guess, you live in the trees?
    You'd have to believe in nation states to comprehend national interest.
    Do trees have internet access? :P

    You didn't answer my question though, the term "interest" is so lose you could put anything into that catergory. If you excepted the fact that 9/11 was an inside government operation (http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/200601...prweb339303_5), as people are starting to do, you would see the next truth, and thats 9/11 was used as precursor for the Iraq war, which again, was based upon a whole deck of lies.

    Now, consider all that to be true, even if you don't just this second. Would you be prepared to back your government if they came forwards tomorrow and said "look, we have conclusive proof that Iran has an atomic bomb ready"? There is alot of skepticism from the national community about the evidence/information surrounding Iraq. Iraq now in ruins, with a dictator gone, and will never fully recover. The attention is being focused on Iran, Bird Flu and many other "fear" stories to divert attention away from the blunders America is falling into.

    The Roman Empire fell because it spread its arms to many different countries, and allowd immigration to disolve its society. This is happening to America right now, yet its focusing attention on "terrorism" and "fear" to distract the masses, whilst its army is spread around the globe, and immigration is allowd to go virtually uncontrolled.

    Its so easy to deny all of this is happening, and find some easy explanation for it all (ie from the government and "experts"), but observe whats happening to America, and tell me that it's in its "national interest"....
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ozymandias)
    Regardless of the intrinsic drawbacks and benefits of nuclear weapons in themselves, the UK is militarily so dependent on the USA there's no point in having them - as has been mentioned, the technology comes from the US and even if it didn't, there's no way the UK would use them independently anyway.
    Why do you think this? Think back to the Falklands war when exactly this happened, in the face of international pressure not to take them back.

    For nuclear weapons you are probably correct that we would act in concert with the US if it ever comes to that, but perhaps not with more conventional weapons.

    Does anyone know if the European Gallileo satellite system would be set up for missile guidance to relinquish the ties to the US system?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Golden Maverick)
    Does anyone know if the European Gallileo satellite system would be set up for missile guidance to relinquish the ties to the US system?
    Yes. Relinquish in the same way prison relinquishes you from work.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Yes. Relinquish in the same way prison relinquishes you from work.
    Aha. Is that a yes, we'll only have europe deciding whether we can use our nukes? Or are you being purely sarcastic?

    I.E. Will that system actually be set up for missile guidance?
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.