Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Well, all the recent anti-terrorism arrests have targetted British born people.
Britain has not officially started a war in a long time, we "liberate" others, therefore we clearly have no natural enemies, except for the aforementioned "terrorists". So, who are we deterring?
Given that the only recent security measures have been against British born individuals in the Midlands and Yorkshire (we invaded Iraq, they did not start it) who exactly is he trying to deter?
'Hello Sir, may I have the name of the city you wish to destroy?'
'Pyŏngyang'
'Could you be spelling that please sir..?'
'P'
'B for Beligerance..?
'No.. P for Pacifism...'
...
time passes
...
'I am sorry sir but the computer is not accepting that name. Please call back again tomorrow... would you like to know the balance on your current account instead...?'
1: It's not independent as in we could only launch with the Americans approval
It's worse than that. When 'we' decide what target we want to hit we have to 'phone up the yanks, on a premium rate number, tell them which rocket, which target, the launch date, and two randomly chosen letters from our code phrase.
[QUOTE=Mailman]That is possibly one of the most ignorant statements I have ever seen on this forum!
The problem with countries like NK and Iran getting ahold of Nukes is that they dont not have any checks and balances in place to ensure these weapons arent abused.
You can go on about america being a totalitarian state as much as you want BUT the fact is GW cannot touch those weapons without Uncle Bob on the corner street knowing about it.
I wouldnt have a problem with NK or Iran having Nukes BUT that would only happen once they have an open and accountable government.
It is not ignorant it is my opinion. I think GW is a far greater threat to global security than the likes of Iran or North Korea - Iraq has proved that. Do you honestly think that the US would allow these countries to have nuclear weapons anyway - Iraq no WMD; Iran are in the early stages of development and the states are all over them like a rash and threatening premptive strikes rather than debate. You are right GW can't touch the weapons without everyone knowing about it - bit late after he's done it though isn't it?
Given that the only recent security measures have been against British born individuals in the Midlands and Yorkshire (we invaded Iraq, they did not start it) who exactly is he trying to deter?
Personally I think nuclear weapons in the hands of the North Koreans etc etc is no more dangerous than having them in the hands of George W.
That is possibly one of the most ignorant statements I have ever seen on this forum!
The problem with countries like NK and Iran getting ahold of Nukes is that they dont not have any checks and balances in place to ensure these weapons arent abused.
You can go on about america being a totalitarian state as much as you want BUT the fact is GW cannot touch those weapons without Uncle Bob on the corner street knowing about it.
I wouldnt have a problem with NK or Iran having Nukes BUT that would only happen once they have an open and accountable government.
Given that the only recent security measures have been against British born individuals in the Midlands and Yorkshire (we invaded Iraq, they did not start it) who exactly is he trying to deter?
Here we are trying to deter other countries from developing nuclear capabilites whilst we are planning on spending 25bn on Trident. Not sure we have had a nuclear arms debate for a while so on you go. Personally I think nuclear weapons in the hands of the North Koreans etc etc is no more dangerous than having them in the hands of George W.
Leave a comment: