Topic: Trident: Should we renew/extend or not?

[ds2190]

By NATO, do you mean the US, the UK and the militant wing of the boy scouts that most European armies have become?

They wouldn't be in the lurch anyway, there will never be a war again. Apparently some new invention called diplomacy will end them all instantly...

Of course we could always give everyone nukes as it would sort out the situation better than trying to resolve problems normally.

[BIGdavalad]

Of course we could always give everyone nukes as it would sort out the situation better than trying to resolve problems normally.

Do you not understand that sometimes situations cannot be resolved without the use of force?

[ds2190]

Do you not understand that sometimes situations cannot be resolved without the use of force?

I do. But you don't seem to understand that there are other means of force beyond the use of nuclear weapons.

In the world we live in there are many ways to punish over countries without the need for firing a gun or launching a missile.

[BIGdavalad]

I do. But you don't seem to understand that there are other means of force beyond the use of nuclear weapons.

In the world we live in there are many ways to punish over countries without the need for firing a gun or launching a missile.

British nuclear weapons are held as a deterrent to stop others nuking us. We have never fired one live. Who's suggesting using nukes to settle anything?

There are many ways, and when they fail (as they often do) then there is only one option - military force.

[ds2190]

British nuclear weapons are held as a deterrent to stop others nuking us. We have never fired one live. Who's suggesting using nukes to settle anything?

There are many ways, and when they fail (as they often do) then there is only one option - military force.

Give me 2 examples of where we have exhausted ALL possible means of non-violent punishment in the last 20 years before using military force.

[nyctex]

BIGdavalad -

How would you rate the NATO forces in ability?

How are the Italians, the Poles, the Dutch, the Germans etc?  I would imagine that some are more useful  than others?

[BIGdavalad]

Give me 2 examples of where we have exhausted ALL possible means of non-violent punishment in the last 20 years before using military force.

"Oh go on Saddam, leave the poor Kuwaitis alone. Please?"

"Look Mr Milosevic, you can't just go round ethinically cleansing people you know. Do it again and there'll be no Holby City after supper next week"

"I say Mr Taleban, you couldn't drop Osama round some time this week could you? We want to have a word with him about some planes and a tower block"

[ds2190]

"Oh go on Saddam, leave the poor Kuwaitis alone. Please?"

"Look Mr Milosevic, you can't just go round ethinically cleansing people you know. Do it again and there'll be no Holby City after supper next week"

"I say Mr Taleban, you couldn't drop Osama round some time this week could you? We want to have a word with him about some planes and a tower block"

In all cases we haven't used every peaceful method available.

[Okkervil]

In all cases we haven't used every peaceful method available.

And what "peaceful methods" would you use against the Taleban? ? ? ?

As for Milosovic, negotiations, sanctions, etc do not save or help those being ethnically cleansed. In fact they often make the situations worse on those being persecuted!

[BIGdavalad]

BIGdavalad -

How would you rate the NATO forces in ability?

How are the Italians, the Poles, the Dutch, the Germans etc?  I would imagine that some are more useful  than others?

The Germans aren't letting their 'soldiers' leave their camps after dark in Afghan. The Italians I worked with in Iraq seemed to spend their time wandering round the HQ in incredibly camp looking uniforms with their shirts open while growing gay little beards. The NATO soldiers in Afghan at the moment (with some honourable exceptions) are doing fuck all while the Brits, Yanks and Cannucks die in the south.

There are some decent soldiers out there, but most European armies have been cut to the bone since 1989 and barely deserve to be called an army. Most European countries seem happy to rely on the US and (to a much lesser extent) UK for their nuclear deterrent and to hope that the Russians never decide to roll through the Fulda Gap.

[BIGdavalad]

In all cases we haven't used every peaceful method available.

So we should sit round in Paris talking while people are being murdered in concentration camps?

[kopite@m45]

calling ds 2190..... I don't know how old you are, but I am getting visions of Saddam Husseins army raping and pillaging their way around Kuwait City, with a John Cleese-type British diplomat in a bowler hat asking them to please stop being frightfully common, and to go back home straight away.

Don't you understand that these people see talking as a sign of weakness ? If you have a big stick, use it. In the end you have to back up your words or just not bother in the first place, and ask our European NATO allies to go hand out some lollipops for the camera.

[Byrnee]

Although it seems hypocritical warning other smaller nations against arming nuclear weapons, in fact it is with sound reasoning.

We have had nuclear weapons in our arsenal for years, as have the US. Never have either country used them as aggressors to start a war, to colonise or to destroy for our own benefit.

Our countries have intelligent, rational people in charge (stop laughing at the back, you all know what I mean) and can be trusted NOT to use these weapons as aggressors.

The new wannabe nuclear powers have not had the chance to prove they are worthy of owning nuclear weapons and simply put, they shouldn't have. It's not worth the risk. If we are ever to encourage the world to disarm (and I doubt that'll ever happen in any of our lifetimes), retaining the status quo is tremendously important. It means that as the democratically elected, wealthy and more advanced nations on the planet, we can slowly but surely try to rid the smaller nations of their nuclear powers, ensuring they are no threat to each other or us, before we in the West (along with Russia and China) begin the process ourselves.

Sadly, it is human nature to War with others. Thankfully our nations nuclear arsenal is unlikely to ever be needed. But disarming as an encouragement for others to follow suit is a bit naive.

There are, undoubtedly, some who would see such an action not as an encouragement to disarm, but as a sign of weakness, allowing them to continue down whatever self-destructive path they choose, knowing that one of the big boys who used to stop them, is no longer a player.

So, it might be a long way off but mutually agreed progressive nuclear disarmament from the Superpowers will only occur once the less stable nations have been conclusively proven to have no nuclear arsenal whatsoever. As I say, no chance in our lifetime.

At this point we can sit around in a big circle singing 'All You Need Is Love'. Too cynical or too naive, you decide.

[Commie Bobbie]

Fucking hell, there is no need absolutely no need at all to have Nuclear weapons.

Give me a reason, apart from 'it makes up look strong'

No it does not, it makes us out to be reactionaries of the worst kind.

[BIGdavalad]

Fucking hell, there is no need absolutely no need at all to have Nuclear weapons.

Give me a reason, apart from 'it makes up look strong'

No it does not, it makes us out to be reactionaries of the worst kind.

Give me a reason we have hospitals, apart from 'to make sick people better'? That is the reason we have them - to make others think twice about using theirs on us.

[kopite@m45]

1 good reason/question. Who will replace Putin ?

[Commie Bobbie]

Give me a reason we have hospitals, apart from 'to make sick people better'? That is the reason we have them - to make others think twice about using theirs on us.

Are you Norman Tebbit?

[BIGdavalad]

Are you Norman Tebbit?

I doubt it as he was a politician while I have done a day's work in my life...

[ds2190]

I doubt it as he was a politician while I have done a day's work in my life...

Perhaps that ignorant view is why you have a similar type of view regarding Trident.

[The 5th Benitle]

Perhaps that ignorant view is why you have a similar type of view regarding Trident.

And you'd know a thing or to about ignorant views, judging by this thread. Commie Bobbie - how's utopia these days?

[ds2190]

And what "peaceful methods" would you use against the Taleban? ? ? ?

As for Milosovic, negotiations, sanctions, etc do not save or help those being ethnically cleansed. In fact they often make the situations worse on those being persecuted!

The Milosovic situation is one where I think war was justified and that was the example I was looking for. As for other ones; I feel that we could have done more to resolve things.

calling ds 2190..... I don't know how old you are, but I am getting visions of Saddam Husseins army raping and pillaging their way around Kuwait City, with a John Cleese-type British diplomat in a bowler hat asking them to please stop being frightfully common, and to go back home straight away.

Don't you understand that these people see talking as a sign of weakness ? If you have a big stick, use it. In the end you have to back up your words or just not bother in the first place, and ask our European NATO allies to go hand out some lollipops for the camera.

Yet another ignorant view. We shouldn't have let Saddam reach that level of power in the first place and his actions are the world's responsibility.

Give me a reason we have hospitals, apart from 'to make sick people better'? That is the reason we have them - to make others think twice about using theirs on us.

Very very weak argument. You cannot compare hospitals which save countless lives to nuclear weapons that can destroy entire countries and/or regions.

You repeat the same argument over and over. There are countless reasons for why we shouldn't have nuclear weapons and only one fundamental reason for why we should (which hasn't actually been proven).

Trident has served the country well in the past when there was a threat of nuclear attacks. Our existing system will last until 2024 and that is sufficient time to hold several NPT conferences and to force other nations to stop their arms policies.

And you'd know a thing or to about ignorant views, judging by this thread. Commie Bobbie - how's utopia these days?

My views are backed up with several reasons, examples, figures and public opinion. Other people's views are backed up by repeating the same statement and mocking those who think otherwise.

On an entirely separate point, for those of you who's policy it is to use force where necessary - why haven't we done anything about the political situations in many parts of Africa? I'll tell you why - it is because we have nothing to gain from Africa, but we have oil to gain from the Middle East.

[The 5th Benitle]

My views are backed up with several reasons, examples, figures and public opinion. Other people's views are backed up by repeating the same statement and mocking those who think otherwise.

All well and good, but the 'same statement' is correct, and the opinions you quote and espouse are flawed. As for figures - is Kaizer always correct?

[ds2190]

All well and good, but the 'same statement' is correct, and the opinions you quote and espouse are flawed. As for figures - is Kaizer always correct?

The 'same statement' is correct in your opinion but not in the opinion of the majority of the British public. Seeing as that is what the government is meant to be acting in the interests of, I think that is a big thing.

[Rob K]

The 'same statement' is correct in your opinion but not in the opinion of the majority of the British public. Seeing as that is what the government is meant to be acting in the interests of, I think that is a big thing.

How do you know it's the majority though?  There's been no referendum/vote on it.

[WorldChampions]

I think:

Your only 16, don't worry yourself

[ds2190]

How do you know it's the majority though?  There's been no referendum/vote on it.

From the various different votes and surverys carried out it suggests the public don't want Trident.

I think:

Your only 16, don't worry yourself

If I could change things then I would have started taking an interest in politics many years ago.

[The 5th Benitle]

From the various different votes and surverys carried out it suggests the public don't want Trident.

Yes, and the various different votes and surveys carried out suggest the public are more bothered about Jade Goody's latest gaffe than issues which could actually affect them. Seriously, taking the British public general as a barometer will fucking guarantee rain.

[ds2190]

Yes, and the various different votes and surveys carried out suggest the public are more bothered about Jade Goody's latest gaffe than issues which could actually affect them. Seriously, taking the British public general as a barometer will fucking guarantee rain.

Yet it is the general public that elect so their opinion does matter.

[The 5th Benitle]

Yet it is the general public that elect so their opinion does matter.

You say that like it's a good thing. I think its a travesty that people who have no idea what or who they're voting for are allowed to, personally. And thats a massive percentage of the country.

[ds2190]

You say that like it's a good thing. I think its a travesty that people who have no idea what or who they're voting for are allowed to, personally. And thats a massive percentage of the country.

So what alternative do you propose? Those who don't care about politics generally don't vote. But if you'd rather have a system where only the elite of society vote then I suppose you could go back to the 1800s.

[The 5th Benitle]

So what alternative do you propose? Those who don't care about politics generally don't vote. But if you'd rather have a system where only the elite of society vote then I suppose you could go back to the 1800s.

I don't know of a better system, I'm bemoaning the state of the general populace more than I am the democratic process.

[Bronx Red]

Maybe you should have included a survey along with the post 

[ratcatcher]

Renew Trident. We need an independent deterent and the lads in the RN deserve the best boats (that submarines to you landlubbers!) and equipment money can buy.

[ds2190]

Maybe you should have included a survey along with the post 

If people had gone looking for resources beyond those I supplied (which they should to make an informed decision) then they would have found surveys

[Bronx Red]

If people had gone looking for resources beyond those I supplied (which they should to make an informed decision) then they would have found surveys

But they ain't rawk surveys and as your asking rawkites maybe a survey here would have answered your question. Because at the end of the day its a yes or no answer imo

[kopite@m45]

So, ds2190 reckons "we shouldn't have allowed Saddam to reach that level of power in the first place".

When do we assume that somebody has a lot of power, too much power, excessive power ?

Who is going to say 'enough' ? And then actually be able to do something about it, given that nobody has any real weapons in your cosy utopia ?

Did you know prior to the invasion in 2003 that the Americans threatened to use nuclear weapons if he used his alleged arsenal of WMD's ? THAT is power.

[Fiend]

What do people think about the idea of 'soft power'?

The way China and India and Russia have entered the World Trade Organisation. If we all become rich and we are dependant on each others trade. Maybe the era of big countries attacking each other is over?

[kesey]

Terrorist attack is the over riding threat to the UK at this moment in time - it is not the only threat. That's why we need to keep our nuclear deterrent - once we lose it, we will probably never get it back and we will be at the mercy of any future nuclear armed hostile government.

Dava mate, each to the own and all that but stop repeating what your bosses tell you.

[BIGdavalad]

Dava mate, each to the own and all that but stop repeating what your bosses tell you.

My bosses have told me nothing. Shockingly I'm not included in the briefings for British nuclear policy.

[BIGdavalad]

Perhaps that ignorant view is why you have a similar type of view regarding Trident.

The view that the vast majority of politicians are oxygen thieving, lying, money grabbing wastes of skin that should be put against a wall and machine gunned? It's the bitter experience of being screwed over by them constantly for pretty much the whole of my professional life (and probably before then too, but I was in school and didn't realise it so much).

The Milosovic situation is one where I think war was justified and that was the example I was looking for. As for other ones; I feel that we could have done more to resolve things.

Like what? The Taleban were never going to hand Osama over, Saddam was never going to withdraw from Kuwait, Hitler would never have withdrawn from Poland, Kaiser Bill wouldn't have pulled out of Belgium and Napolean wouldn't have stopped building his empire. As terrible as war is it is sometimes very necessary and people in this country sleep safely in their beds at night because men are willing, and have been willing in the past, to go and do those terrible things when the politicians have messed up and got us into a war.

Yet another ignorant view. We shouldn't have let Saddam reach that level of power in the first place and his actions are the world's responsibility.

So you're saying that we should have removed him from power before he could do bad things? Haven't you been marching through London protesting about the US and UK doing just that?

Very very weak argument. You cannot compare hospitals which save countless lives to nuclear weapons that can destroy entire countries and/or regions.

You can compare how many lives the nuclear deterrent may have saved in preventing nuclear war throughout the Cold War - so lets start the populations of the United States, Great Britain, Europe, western USSR and then from the fallout the entire world.

You repeat the same argument over and over. There are countless reasons for why we shouldn't have nuclear weapons and only one fundamental reason for why we should (which hasn't actually been proven).

Most things have only one fundamental reason to exist. Not one of the arguments for not getting Trident renewed has actually made any real sense in the real world.

Trident has served the country well in the past when there was a threat of nuclear attacks. Our existing system will last until 2024 and that is sufficient time to hold several NPT conferences and to force other nations to stop their arms policies.

And when we get to 2024 and it turns out that no one else has got rid of their nukes, some more countries have them, we have no nuclear deterrent left and there's no one left in the country who knows how to build one, who shall we go begging to for protection?

My views are backed up with several reasons, examples, figures and public opinion. Other people's views are backed up by repeating the same statement and mocking those who think otherwise.

A poll in the Times last week found that 52% of the country agreed with renewing Trident. Public opinion counts for pretty much nothing anyway - let's all be honest here, the majority of the public are far too stupid to understand anything they haven't read in the Sun anyway.

On an entirely separate point, for those of you who's policy it is to use force where necessary - why haven't we done anything about the political situations in many parts of Africa? I'll tell you why - it is because we have nothing to gain from Africa, but we have oil to gain from the Middle East.

Like what? Invade? Isn't it a bit hypocritical to ask for invasions of some countries while protesting about others being invaded? Having said that, I'm pretty sure Sierra Leone is still part of Africa...