UK Politics

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

It's not down to the MP's who is accepted in and Farage can become a member. All it would take is whoever is leader/interim leader to agree and the 1922 committee to agree and he would be in.

what MP is going to let him in as leader? I can only see Patel or Braverman doing that, maybe, and don't think it will be either of them. Will be Badenoch or Cleverly or Mordaunt. Actually I guess a lot will depend on who is left?

[steviewevie]

 

[Nobody Interesting]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

 

Only the UK and France have their own nuclear weapons.

 

Not one of the other NATO countries in Europe that have none has been attacked.

Why does the UK need them and use the excuse that without them we will be attacked when that is clearly untrue?

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Only the UK and France have their own nuclear weapons.

 

Not one of the other NATO countries in Europe that have none has been attacked.

Why does the UK need them and use the excuse that without them we will be attacked when that is clearly untrue?

 

They don't need them when they know the USA, France and the UK have them.

[steviewevie]

25 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Only the UK and France have their own nuclear weapons.

 

Not one of the other NATO countries in Europe that have none has been attacked.

Why does the UK need them and use the excuse that without them we will be attacked when that is clearly untrue?

The others can't be trusted

[lazyred]

24 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Only the UK and France have their own nuclear weapons.

Kind of but NATO has a nuclear sharing agreement. The USA stores nuclear weapons in other NATO countries for use by those countries in war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing

 

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, Ommadawn said:

 

They don't need them when they know the USA, France and the UK have them.

Some of them have US nukes... it's just that UK and France developed their own back in the 50s/60s.

[steviewevie]

I get wanting to disarm our nukes, I used to support cnd and wore the badge to school and got quite a lot of sh*t for it ..but now I'm old and wise and nore fascist hawk and at moment with Russia and NATO and Trump and all that stuff...maybe having nukes as a deterrent isn't such a bad idea.

 

But nukes as a deterrent work...until they don't and then we're all dead.

[Nobody Interesting]

33 minutes ago, Ommadawn said:

 

They don't need them when they know the USA, France and the UK have them.

So the UK don't need them when they know France and the USA have them.

[Nobody Interesting]

25 minutes ago, lazyred said:

Kind of but NATO has a nuclear sharing agreement. The USA stores nuclear weapons in other NATO countries for use by those countries in war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing

 

 

Not kind of, exactly that - yes other countires have US owned ones but only the UK and France own their own.

The UK does not need to own it's own and the money is far better spent elsewhere.

[Nobody Interesting]

30 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

The others can't be trusted

 

What others?

[Nobody Interesting]

26 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Some of them have US nukes... it's just that UK and France developed their own back in the 50s/60s.

 

The UK buys theirs from the USA.

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

What others?

The others 

[Nobody Interesting]

18 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I get wanting to disarm our nukes, I used to support cnd and wore the badge to school and got quite a lot of sh*t for it ..but now I'm old and wise and nore fascist hawk and at moment with Russia and NATO and Trump and all that stuff...maybe having nukes as a deterrent isn't such a bad idea.

 

But nukes as a deterrent work...until they don't and then we're all dead.

 

and yet NATO countries that have nine, nor have US nukes on their land have not been attacked.................. why?

We don't need our own, others manage without them and always have.

[Nobody Interesting]

Just now, steviewevie said:

The others 

 

Still does not answer the question nor clarify your reply to my post

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Not kind of, exactly that - yes other countires have US owned ones but only the UK and France own their own.

The UK does not need to own it's own and the money is far better spent elsewhere.

Is that the Greens argument? To save money?

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Still does not answer the question nor clarify your reply to my post

The others.

Not US, UK and France.

[Neil]

3 hours ago, steviewevie said:

what MP is going to let him in as leader?

any mp who wants to remain an mp, alongside any Farage moves they'll be opinion polls suggesting what might happen with him as tory leader, tory MPs will go along for the ride.

 

 

[Nobody Interesting]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

Is that the Greens argument? To save money?

 

No, it's a comment from me that as we do not need them, as shown by countries that do not have them, that the money to replace Trident (£200 billion est) could be far better spent elsewhere.

It is money we do not have.

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

and yet NATO countries that have nine, nor have US nukes on their land have not been attacked.................. why?

We don't need our own, others manage without them and always have.

You know how NATO works right?

I guess we could just all rely on US... I'm sure they'll always be there for us...

[Nobody Interesting]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

The others.

Not US, UK and France.

 

So we don't trust Spain then?

or Germany, Norway, Sweden, Italy etc etc etc?

[steviewevie]

Just now, Nobody Interesting said:

 

So we don't trust Spain then?

or Germany, Norway, Sweden, Italy etc etc etc?

Exactly. 

[Nobody Interesting]

Just now, steviewevie said:

You know how NATO works right?

I guess we could just all rely on US... I'm sure they'll always be there for us...

 

Of course I know how it works................................. and it works the same way for all the NATO members that DO NOT have nukes of their own! Is that too hard to understand or must the UK have them to be a big country like we thought we once were?

[Neil]

7 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Not kind of, exactly that - yes other countires have US owned ones but only the UK and France own their own.

The UK does not need to own it's own and the money is far better spent elsewhere.

the money supports the sorts of high skill/long term employment/ jobs that people want their politicians to create for them.

 

the jobs don't make nukes right, but do add a further factor to the issue.

[Neil]

4 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

No, it's a comment from me that as we do not need them, as shown by countries that do not have them, that the money to replace Trident (£200 billion est) could be far better spent elsewhere.

It is money we do not have.

it is money spent elsewhere, its spent sustaining highly-skilled- jobs all round the country.