Say NO to upgrading nucler weapons!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Max

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
5,366
Location
Cardiff
Is that actually a link to the British Communist Party? You support communists? :confused:
 

Max

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
5,366
Location
Cardiff
I'm getting into a political argument but to be perfectly honest the whole principle of communism doesn't work!
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
17,929
Location
0035
Agree with a less extreme version of communism, where the government owns most things, but people can own their own homes, etc.
Imagine if the Government ran Tesco, with their <£2bn profits per annum, what they could do with that; better services, lower taxes, etc?

Trying to get rid of Nuclear Weapons was one of the many reasons Labour lost in 1979 and onwards, most people thinks it'll make us unsafe, and Brown said today he'll support them.
 
Joined
23 Feb 2006
Messages
313
ikar said:
What do you know about it? You never lived in that system.
Maybe he hasnt, but everyone has, in history learnt the effects of Communism and it just doesnt work, full stop.

I don't have any problem with upgrading nuclear weapons. The government wastes money on most things why not waste it on defence.
 

Demps

Member
Joined
11 May 2006
Messages
692
Location
York
just because it involves the word nuclear does not mean communist, look at america it has the larges Nuclear fleet at its disposal, just one of those nuclear subs can destroy a country!, I find it is a result of the rising tempers in the east. I am not exactly for it but on the other hand what else do we do?, we can not stop other countries from it, its like a chain which is hard to break (cold war as a example).

Why do we criticise everythink the government does!, can you tell me what the government has wasted money on?

On the subject of communism, pfft erm well what do i say, people are now seriously effected by the governments, communism would be taking it too far and it never works. Communism never works because of the governments love of money, there always leaks of where the money actualy goes, the public largly suffer, the actual fact that all of the population on avergae should be similar in wealth, What justifies the right for the government to even the wealth of the country. "The world is harsh, but to live in the world it is even harsher"
 

Sprog

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2005
Messages
1,315
Location
SPM
we need nukes..for a detterant..if anything

nuclear weapons technology fasinates me.....id really like 2 touch one one day..jst imagine all that power at your fingertips :|
 

Lewisham2221

Member
Joined
23 Jun 2005
Messages
1,014
Location
Staffordshire
Nick W said:
The proposed upgrade will be up to £30bn, that's on average £500 per person in UK.

Thats worth 10 CTRLs, and could pay for so many better things.

:protest:sCRAP TRIDENT!:protest:
http://www.communist-party.org.uk/downloads/CPposter_ScrapTrident.pdf
It depends what you class as 'better things'. Just the presence of nuclear weapons is enough of a deterrent to stop attacks from other countries, although they obviously aren't much use against terrorists.

You could argue just as much against spending money to upgrade anything just because it already exists.
 

Sprog

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2005
Messages
1,315
Location
SPM
or not...im perfectly sane thank you

and my imaginary freind agrees with me

and he says he doesnt like your attitude ...so there!
 

eezypeazy

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2005
Messages
626
Location
UK
I do love the way these threads wander about - from nuclear weapons upgrade, through communist and capitalist systems, different theories of economics, and back to our nuclear defence.

As I get older and (hopefully!) wiser, I come to realise many things. Firstly, as Royalscot pointed out, in this world it's wise to have some forms of defence, and the nuclear option is probably here to stay, until something even more formidable comes along, which will render it useless. Secondly, in free democracies we elect governments to do things - we don't elect them to do nothing! Consequently, governments are always looking for more things to do; and, in the absence of "big things" such as world wars, governments turn their attention to what we might define as "little things", so that the tentacles of government forever reach outwards, probing every crevice of our daily lives. This, of course, requires more money, which, sadly, governments do not have unlimited supplies of. They can't raise much more money than they already do from taxation; and the problem is compounded by the falling birth rate in the West (meaning that the supply of new people to the economy, as both a labour force and taxpayers, is slowing) and the fact that we're all living longer (placing more demands on the state and pension funds at the other end!).

For almost two centuries, UK Chancellors of the Exchequer have promised us growing economies, growing incomes, and even more "jam tomorrow". Thanks to the "demographic time bomb", a Chancellor is going to have to tell us, one day before long, that the economy has peaked, there is no more growth to be achieved, and that we've all got to spend less and save more.... or have more babies!

So, defence spending is here to stay - live with it!

eezypeazy
 

TicketMan

Member
Joined
20 Nov 2005
Messages
588
Location
Birmingham
Sprog said:
we need nukes..for a detterant..if anything

nuclear weapons technology fasinates me.....id really like 2 touch one one day..jst imagine all that power at your fingertips :|
No you don't wanna do that - yer balls will drop off :o ;)
 

TheSlash

Established Member
Joined
7 Jun 2005
Messages
2,339
Location
Marwell Zoo
Nukes are a double bluff these days. If a single country fired 1 nuke in anger, it wouild be the end of the world due to the chain reaction of partners firing on offendig countries
 

matt

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
30 Jun 2005
Messages
6,845
Location
Rugby
Nick W said:
I thought there wasn't anywhere near enough weapons to destory the whole world.
Nuclear war is MAD = mutually assured destruction
 

LucaZone

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2006
Messages
752
Location
West End, Surrey
Reminance of Nuclear Weapons in Berkshire, established by the USAF, but returned to public property over the last decade :)

[Images to come, due to errors with Fotopics.net]

Each Bunker is built to withstand a nuclear blast above the base or a direct hit from a 1500lb bomb. Each one has 3 sections, each sectioned contained a Mobile Launch Vehicle, each vehicle carried 2 cruise missles.

If we dont renew our military power, how will that affect our position of ruling in the world? what defence will we use against other military forces?

As one sign on Greenham Common states : "We cant disinvent nuclear weapons, and they wont just go away. We have to evolve the social and political skills in order to render them useless."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top