Havana Saint Posted July 18, 2016 Report Share Posted July 18, 2016 We have a renewal of nuclear weapons. Sleep well Scotland.....the mind boggles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babychunder Posted July 19, 2016 Report Share Posted July 19, 2016 We've never needed to use them and I hope we never do. How about bluffing we have them, and spending the money on something else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted July 19, 2016 Report Share Posted July 19, 2016 Can't do that. Tony Blair will invade us. nips, ex-montrosesaintee, fazman1977 and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendo Posted July 20, 2016 Report Share Posted July 20, 2016 The Trident vote was a foregone conclusion sadly. For me the outcome wasn't as disappointing as some of the arguments that people used to justify their existence. Arguing that they created job is like arguing to retain slavery because labour rates would go up. It was also disappointing to see politicians who purported to have opposed nuclear weapons all their lives voting for them. And don't even get me start on Hillary Benn; Tony must be rolling in his grave. sixties saintee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rik2304 Posted July 20, 2016 Report Share Posted July 20, 2016 I sleep better at night knowing that if the Ruskies nuke us then a short while after I'm vaporised millions of Russians will similarly be vaporised in retaliation. rickardo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted July 20, 2016 Report Share Posted July 20, 2016 Nonsense. Communist. It's great that we have weapons of mass destruction to protect our food banks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunblanemike Posted July 21, 2016 Report Share Posted July 21, 2016 A large number of uk MPs have a vested interest in the companies that make trident or in the banks etc that supply money to these companies. This is among both Tory and red Tory MPs. There should be rules in place that stop MPs voting in issues in which they can gain monetarily. I thought there was such a rule but it clearly did not apply in this vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AthensSaint Posted July 21, 2016 Report Share Posted July 21, 2016 Yet another issue that we shouldn't let local yokels vote on by means of a referendum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted July 21, 2016 Report Share Posted July 21, 2016 A large number of uk MPs have a vested interest in the companies that make trident or in the banks etc that supply money to these companies. This is among both Tory and red Tory MPs. There should be rules in place that stop MPs voting in issues in which they can gain monetarily. I thought there was such a rule but it clearly did not apply in this vote. Normal MP's have to declare an interest, but having done so can then vote how they like. Ministers would be in fairly deep brown stuff if they did this, though. Most of them sell-up any potentially dodgy or even all investments on appointment these days. But that's not how the money is made - it comes in directorships and consultancies with the companies they regulate after they leave office. In fairness, Rolls Royce, BAE etc are such ginormous companies that it would be difficult not to have any connection with them in some way if you invest. You might not own shares in them, but you might in the company that makes a widget for them, or sells them loo roll, etc. That's why so-called ethical investments are a bit of a joke - economies now are so integrated that everything relies on everything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunblanemike Posted July 21, 2016 Report Share Posted July 21, 2016 Perhaps unsurprisingly these banks, in particular RBS and HSBC, also supply money to the companies that make the Russian equivalent of trident. These weapons are far too profitable to be voted out by MPs, it has nowt to do with deterrents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted July 21, 2016 Report Share Posted July 21, 2016 Spot on. I think a combination of that, little Englanders empire types (ie most of the Tories and UKIP and much of Labour) wanting to "keep Britain at the top table", and the fact that only colonised Scottish people will die if there's an accident explains it. A solution remains available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gort Posted July 25, 2016 Report Share Posted July 25, 2016 Is anyone seriously suggesting we get rid of them whilst China and Russia etc have them, saving £200 billion is no good if the country is radio-active. One bomb hitting London alone would cause £200 billion damage in about 20 seconds, also 5 million dead. The money would be spent on aircraft carriers, tanks and other weapons if the nuclear weapons were scrapped, not on bairns and foodbanks as some believe. Do you think the Yanks would have bombed the Japs if the Japs could have sent nuclear weapons to the Yanks west coast, almost certainly not. Fair enough, if EVERYONE gets rid of them then fine, but not the UK on it's own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babychunder Posted July 27, 2016 Report Share Posted July 27, 2016 Not everyone is going to disarm at once. Someone has to go first. It could be us. HelsinkiSaintee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted July 27, 2016 Report Share Posted July 27, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.