|
|
Should never start a discussion of politics or religion. We all have our own points to put across. Some would love Labour to get back in others like me would prefer a country to be run properly where at some point it has to pay it's debts as we all have to do in life. Hopefully for most of us he will remain as opposition up to and after the next election and will just become another Ed Millibland
The debt/defecit has always been there, the tories would love to convince you they are reducing it, when in fact they are maintaining it. By maintaining it, they can keep the austerity measures in place, and introduce more and more, to reduce the defecit of course. £100bn Trident would be a good start to reduce some debt, no-one is ever going to use it, what's the point?Originally Posted by Kevinb
Right I am going to bite here. Its called a deterrant for a reason, just because we have never used them doesnt mean we do not need them. Other countries aside in terms of what they are and are not developing, trident means we keep a permanant seat on the UN Security council and maintain a veto right. Give up Tridant, give up that right.
Not only that the countries who are actively seeking to develop nuclear capability (Iran and North Korea are the two big ones) are the exact reason we need to keep it. Its not so much the state we need to consider, but the ability for a group such as ISIS to capture and use it for their own reasons. The ability to strike first in a situation like this should not be given up under any circumstances as the alternative wouldnt be worth living for.
Anyone who seriously thinks we can afford to get rid of the nuclear deterrant to save a tiny bit of money in the schem of things to spend on who knows what must live with their head in the clouds and has no real understanding of a far far bigger picture.
The bigger picture, would therefore to be to scrap nuclear weapons worldwide, no? No-one is going to use them, bar the odd nutjob organisation, so why does the developed world build something it has no use for? Policing the nutjob states that try to develop them on the side, would be another matter.
You sadly can no un-invent technology otherwise I am sure they would have been got rid of. People will work out how to do it on their own accord and one day we will likely need them, you cant just build these things in days as and when you need them and even if we could the cost would be 10x that of a planned renewal and maintanance.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
