The Trident Debate - Page 3 - SV650.org

05-12-06, 12:22 AM

Sometimes you don't have to use weapons, the fact that you have them is more than enough of a deterent....

When the bully in the playground realises that you have a few mates with you, he decides that your not worth hitting and just "shakes a big stick at you". All you just have to do is make sure you have a big stick to shake back too...

.

05-12-06, 12:45 AM

I think we'd be better off by setting an example and getting rid of the whole lot.
We signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, as they become outdated they should be de-commissioned and that's that.

northwind · 05-12-06, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jelster

Sometimes you don't have to use weapons, the fact that you have them is more than enough of a deterent....

When the bully in the playground realises that you have a few mates with you, he decides that your not worth hitting and just "shakes a big stick at you". All you just have to do is make sure you have a big stick to shake back too...

.

It's more like taking a hand grenade to school... Yes, you can stop the bully with it, but better all round if you don't.

05-12-06, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by northwind

It's more like taking a hand grenade to school...

northwind · 05-12-06, 01:32 AM

What, are you trying to say you never did?

Hmm, maybe that's the scottish education system at work

SoulKiss · 05-12-06, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by northwind

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mogs

Mutually Assured Destruction.

Fine, but MAD stops working when the launcher doesn't care about a nuclear response, ie, they are mental/a fundamentalist/plain evil. Considering how non-independant our independant deterrant is, it's all a bit of a joke. But being a "nuclear superpower" apparently gives you extra political clout. Doesn't seem to bother the japanese too much, but then they've learned the hard lessons of Godzilla.

And dont forget their secret army of Mechs.

I hear that every Toyota and Honda can, if it recieves the right command, transform into a fully armed killing machine.

Citroen HAS been working on this technology, but so far their machines can only ice-skate and dance.

David

05-12-06, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by northwind

It's more like taking a hand grenade to school... Yes, you can stop the bully with it, but better all round if you don't.

I quite agree, but you and I both know that there are some people who only ever understand their own language. Again, back to the playground bully, the best way to stop him is to let him know in no uncertain terms that if he hits you again, he's going to feel a lot of pain himself.

Having these weapons "should" present us with better strategic defences in the future; I for one don't want to have to rely on the US coming to our aid. If that were the case we definitely would be the 51st star on the flag.....

.

arc123 · 05-12-06, 10:11 AM

I agree in part with Razor.

The irony in going to war on the supposed threat of WMD, and then spending £20 billion on......... WMD. This attitude of 'we are the goodies' and the 'Mad mullahs are the baddies' is short-sighted at best (or plain ignorant if we're been realistic).

We have been told repeatedly for the last few years that 'international terrorism' is the most dangerous threat to our freedoms and democracy 'ever' - so this £20billion spend is going to help with this how?

Last year, the government promised that there would be a full and open debate on the future of Britain's nuclear weapons. This has not happened and is unlikely to happen IMO.

I am not against re-newing the Trident armorment - but any decision should only be made after full and informed public and Parliamentary debate.

northwind · 05-12-06, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jelster

I quite agree, but you and I both know that there are some people who only ever understand their own language. Again, back to the playground bully, the best way to stop him is to let him know in no uncertain terms that if he hits you again, he's going to feel a lot of pain himself.

Absolutely... But we have a weapon that's basically no use to us as a first strike, and completely useless against most of the threats we currently face. I'm not saying don't spend the money on the military, though I'd prefer if we didn't have to... I'm saying spend it on the conventional weapons which we'll actually use, or tactical weapons which might, some day, be pretty handy if we're unexpectedly invaded by China and need to dispose of an army in a hurry.

05-12-06, 12:58 PM

Much that I would like there to be total disarmament of nukes everywhere, the fact is that whilst there are still enemies and rogue states, I would rather have the biggest possible stick to deter them with. Nukes have been invented, you can't change that fact, and so its better that level headed democracies control them than crazy North Koreans. If we get rid of ours, do you think the north koreans would stop making theirs?! No, they'd just buy a cheap diesel-electric sub from the Russian black market, and sail up the thames and throw a little a-bomb into the houses of parliament.

05-12-06, 01:32 AM	#25
northwind Moderator Mega Poster Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: In the garage where I belong Posts: 17,083	What, are you trying to say you never did? Hmm, maybe that's the scottish education system at work __________________ "We are the angry mob, we read the papers every day We like what we like, we hate what we hate But we're oh so easily swayed"

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Debate at work..	Sean_C	Idle Banter	30	10-09-08 01:10 PM
garage debate of the day	dizzyblonde	Idle Banter	26	11-04-08 10:27 AM
In a debate with someone need 2nd opinions	PickYourPoison06	Bikes - Talk & Issues	12	10-10-06 12:19 PM
Let's have a heated debate!	philipMac	Idle Banter	20	29-04-06 01:54 PM
Todays hot debate	Viney	Idle Banter	36	28-04-05 01:49 PM

05-12-06, 12:22 AM	#21
Jelster Guest Posts: n/a	Sometimes you don't have to use weapons, the fact that you have them is more than enough of a deterent.... When the bully in the playground realises that you have a few mates with you, he decides that your not worth hitting and just "shakes a big stick at you". All you just have to do is make sure you have a big stick to shake back too... .

05-12-06, 12:45 AM	#22
Razor Guest Posts: n/a	I think we'd be better off by setting an example and getting rid of the whole lot. We signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, as they become outdated they should be de-commissioned and that's that.

05-12-06, 10:11 AM	#28
arc123 Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Leicester Posts: 53	I agree in part with Razor. The irony in going to war on the supposed threat of WMD, and then spending £20 billion on......... WMD. This attitude of 'we are the goodies' and the 'Mad mullahs are the baddies' is short-sighted at best (or plain ignorant if we're been realistic). We have been told repeatedly for the last few years that 'international terrorism' is the most dangerous threat to our freedoms and democracy 'ever' - so this £20billion spend is going to help with this how? Last year, the government promised that there would be a full and open debate on the future of Britain's nuclear weapons. This has not happened and is unlikely to happen IMO. I am not against re-newing the Trident armorment - but any decision should only be made after full and informed public and Parliamentary debate.

05-12-06, 12:58 PM	#30
Warthog Guest Posts: n/a	Much that I would like there to be total disarmament of nukes everywhere, the fact is that whilst there are still enemies and rogue states, I would rather have the biggest possible stick to deter them with. Nukes have been invented, you can't change that fact, and so its better that level headed democracies control them than crazy North Koreans. If we get rid of ours, do you think the north koreans would stop making theirs?! No, they'd just buy a cheap diesel-electric sub from the Russian black market, and sail up the thames and throw a little a-bomb into the houses of parliament.