NSEFAN
Established Member
I wonder who would trade the uncertainty of Brexit for the fairly binary outcomes of mutually assured destruction. At least with the latter you know where you stand!
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...
- Thread starter ainsworth74
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Johnuk123
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 2,802
I wonder who would trade the uncertainty of Brexit for the fairly binary outcomes of mutually assured destruction. At least with the latter you know where you stand!
This is one of the misconceptions that a war at the time would have been a nuclear one when it plainly wouldn't have been.
Really? Every declassified Warsaw Pact war plan that I've read about involved the massive use of tactical nuclear weapons throughout European NATO and as far as I'm aware every former senior Warsaw Pact officer who has spoken on the subject has confirmed that to the be case. Similarly Soviet Doctrine always held nuclear weapons to simply be another tool of warfare rather than a special case.
This is of course before we consider NATO's reliance on nuclear weapons to plug the gap in its conventional weaknesses (with the best will in the world through most of the Cold War there's no way NORTHAG and CENTAG would have been able to hold off Pact forces invading Western Europe conventionally for long). Sure the idea of NATO as a trip-wire (they invade, we confirm that it's happening and immediately nuke them) may be somewhat overblown but again everything I've come across suggests that NATO intended to go nuclear very early in any conflict.
You'll forgive me but I don't see how it is 'plain' that a direct conflict between East and West in Europe during the Cold War wouldn't have been nuclear. I would argue the opposite it true.
Johnuk123
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 2,802
Argue away, I have an opinion and you have yours.
EM2
Established Member
I'm more worried now than I was then, but it's nothing to do with the EU, it's because of that overgrown man-baby that's in charge across the Atlantic.
I'm sure he's overdosed on tartrazine, that's why he's that strange orange colour and so hyperactive.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
It probably makes you laugh, though I can't quite conceive a laughing Johnuk123.
(I'm 30.)
I'm not currently worried. He's fired the first salvo, time will tell how the other 2 branches of the US government responds. If they respond well, then it won't be concerning. If the best they can muster is a couple of Corbyns (the SI unit of opposition, 1-milliCameron, or 1-deciHague) it will be very bad.
backontrack
Established Member
hock:
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I honestly don't understand what you are worrying about. Assuming you to be of a fairly young age who knows what the world will look like when retirement comes around. It will be when we are all 94 anyway
....or five score years and many in my case....
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
May I respond with a verse from the British satirical Christmas carol from many years ago....
"God rest ye, merry gentlemen
Lie safely in your bed
The independent British bomb is flying overhead
It's off to kill the Russians when the rest of us are dead
O tidings of comfort and joy, comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy"
EM2
Established Member
One branch seems to have disappeared already. The Judicial Branch has vanished from the White House website:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/1600/legislative-branch
DarloRich
Veteran Member
....or five score years and many in my case....
at least you got to retire - many of us will not.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Could the same be said for the Umpa Lumpas from the film "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" ......or have we just traced the one that escaped...
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 16,789
There was a proposal for NATO to build an army sufficient to repel the Soviets conventionally, but it would have required something approaching ninety manoeuvre divisions. The finance ministers of Europe recoiled from such a commitment and the plan was abandoned in the 50s in favour of battlefield nuclear weapons.
Indeed by the 80s the BAOR had come to the conclusion that its previous estimates of a thirty-day battle were optimistic and that it would only be able to contain the Soviet attack on the North German Plain [with support from the West Germans, Dutch, Belgians, French, Luxembourgers and Americans] for six days, suffering massive casualties.
By day seven it would be on the retreat and would have suffered over 60% casualties, and by day eight it would have exhausted the entire 30-day ammunition scale.
At which point your solutions are surrender or use battlefield nuclear weapons to shatter the Soviet second (or third) echelon before it rolls over the ruins of the first echelon and the combined Western European (and American) Armies.
And if the Soviets reach France the French were well known to have a theory that they would start using nuclear weapons to prevent them from crossing over the border.
Indeed by the 80s the BAOR had come to the conclusion that its previous estimates of a thirty-day battle were optimistic and that it would only be able to contain the Soviet attack on the North German Plain [with support from the West Germans, Dutch, Belgians, French, Luxembourgers and Americans] for six days, suffering massive casualties.
By day seven it would be on the retreat and would have suffered over 60% casualties, and by day eight it would have exhausted the entire 30-day ammunition scale.
At which point your solutions are surrender or use battlefield nuclear weapons to shatter the Soviet second (or third) echelon before it rolls over the ruins of the first echelon and the combined Western European (and American) Armies.
And if the Soviets reach France the French were well known to have a theory that they would start using nuclear weapons to prevent them from crossing over the border.
Last edited:
Debate on the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill ongoing now, prior to the vote.
Have to say, after a good quality debate from all sides of the house, the closing speeches from Jenny Chapman (Shadow minister for existing the EU), and in particular David Jones (Minister for Exiting the EU and a neighbouring MP of mine) have been poor.
Have to say, after a good quality debate from all sides of the house, the closing speeches from Jenny Chapman (Shadow minister for existing the EU), and in particular David Jones (Minister for Exiting the EU and a neighbouring MP of mine) have been poor.
Last edited:
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Vote passes. Obviously.
No surprise there.
The Daily Mail has already kindly provided a list of all those who voted against the government (not providing a list of those who supported the government), although has managed to avoid using words like "traitor" or "enemies of the people".
The Daily Mail has already kindly provided a list of all those who voted against the government (not providing a list of those who supported the government), although has managed to avoid using words like "traitor" or "enemies of the people".
It was quite amusing to hear one MP say "suicide" as the results of the vote were read out - I can only hope that they are proven to be wrong, but I guess it is time to sit back and watch the show unfurl.
It'll be interesting to see the final list including which MPs didn't vote in the end (and also so we can see who voted against their constituents) - by my count, 612 voted, so 34 who didn't vote (plus Sinn Féin). It's also interesting to see that of MPs around Nottingham, Anna Soubry who was one of the most vehemently against Brexit voted in line with her party, whilst the MPs for Nottingham North and South both voted against it.
edit: It does occur to me that this is still only the second reading of the bill in the Commons. Still plenty of other stuff to hammer through, but I've no doubt it'll pass through the rest of the stages fairly easily - maybe the lords will be slightly reduced majority but it'll still pass with little to no resistance.
It'll be interesting to see the final list including which MPs didn't vote in the end (and also so we can see who voted against their constituents) - by my count, 612 voted, so 34 who didn't vote (plus Sinn Féin). It's also interesting to see that of MPs around Nottingham, Anna Soubry who was one of the most vehemently against Brexit voted in line with her party, whilst the MPs for Nottingham North and South both voted against it.
edit: It does occur to me that this is still only the second reading of the bill in the Commons. Still plenty of other stuff to hammer through, but I've no doubt it'll pass through the rest of the stages fairly easily - maybe the lords will be slightly reduced majority but it'll still pass with little to no resistance.
Last edited:
northwichcat
Veteran Member
Ken Clarke was the only Conservative MP to oppose the bill but only 612 MPs voted so an equally interesting list would be the 30 or so who didn't vote.
PHILIPE
Veteran Member
Owen Smith, who stood against Jeremy Corbyn a few months ago, voted against the Bill. However, he voted against not only the referendum vote but also against his own constituents who voted for Brexit.
Last edited:
Do you think it is acceptable to destroy lives by stopping people from living and working in the EU?
PHILIPE
Veteran Member
RichmondCommu
Established Member
Has your life been destroyed?
No one knows for sure, but surely that's looking like the most likely result? So if it is the final outcome, is it acceptable?
It will be if our right to live and work in the EU is removed.
Yet again, for a Remainer you show a lack of compassion. You sound like a Leaver.
RichmondCommu
Established Member
No I sound like someone who has a sense of perspective. There are plenty of Syrians who have had their lives destroyed through civil war. Your life won't be destroyed simply because we choose not to allow freedom of movement. If overseas based European companies want to employ you then they will, either through a points based system or through sponsorship. Just like in Australia.
Last edited:
See, you just don't care. Just because other people have it bad doesn't mean I won't. My life will be over and I might as well be dead.
Also, what about retiring without working? That's a different story.
- Status