Trident and stuff

[woolley]

 

Why would she? In days gone by you'd never even have known there had been a malfunction!

Don't complain about a "lack of open government" ever again...

 

It's a defence matter. You don't need to know and neither do potential adversaries. It had no relevance to the parliamentary vote on renewal.

[rmanx]

 

It's a defence matter. You don't need to know and neither do potential adversaries. It had no relevance to the parliamentary vote on renewal.

 

 

The fact is doesn't work would not have an effect of a vote as to whether to keep it???

[P.K.]

 

 

Why would she? In days gone by you'd never even have known there had been a malfunction!

Don't complain about a "lack of open government" ever again...

 

It's a defence matter. You don't need to know and neither do potential adversaries. It had no relevance to the parliamentary vote on renewal.

 

 

Bollocks.

 

You can only make an informed decision when you have all of the current information.

 

It was clearly a deliberate decision NOT to inform prior to the vote. And the only reason for that is it may well have swayed the decision.

 

In the same way that the default PM refused to answer Marr's question. That he asked FOUR times. On national tv. WTF?

 

Untrustworthy is the right word from now on.....

 

Edit : piss-poor grammar

[Andy Onchan]

I would have thought such a sensitive issue would have come under national security Rules in the House.

 

But then may be not, as it wouldn't sell newspapers, would it?

 

Does the UK still have Official Secrets any more, or are they up for grabs to the highest bidder?

 

ETA: just askin'

[Tarne]

The paperwork is still there Andy, that's for sure

[woolley]

 

 

It's a defence matter. You don't need to know and neither do potential adversaries. It had no relevance to the parliamentary vote on renewal.

 

 

The fact is doesn't work would not have an effect of a vote as to whether to keep it???

 

It might have reinforced the need to update it if anything. It does work. It has been tested successfully 150 times. This time it didn't. So what?

[woolley]

 

 

 

Why would she? In days gone by you'd never even have known there had been a malfunction!

Don't complain about a "lack of open government" ever again...

 

It's a defence matter. You don't need to know and neither do potential adversaries. It had no relevance to the parliamentary vote on renewal.

 

 

Bollocks.

 

You can only make an informed decision when you have all of the current information.

 

It was clearly a deliberate decision NOT to inform prior to the vote. And the only reason for that is it may well have swayed the decision.

 

In the same way that the default PM refused to answer Marr's question. That he asked FOUR times. On national tv. WTF?

 

Untrustworthy is the right word from now on.....

 

Edit : piss-poor grammar

 

Cameron's spin doctors decided to keep it secret at the time. It doesn't matter either way now. Are we saying that the views of UK parliamentarians are so equivocal on such a fundamental matter that they could be swayed by one abortive test launch?

[rmanx]

 

 

 

It's a defence matter. You don't need to know and neither do potential adversaries. It had no relevance to the parliamentary vote on renewal.

 

 

The fact is doesn't work would not have an effect of a vote as to whether to keep it???

 

It might have reinforced the need to update it if anything. It does work. It has been tested successfully 150 times. This time it didn't. So what?

 

 

Its not a deterrent if it doesn't work that one time you really need it to.

[woolley]

 

 

 

 

It's a defence matter. You don't need to know and neither do potential adversaries. It had no relevance to the parliamentary vote on renewal.

 

 

The fact is doesn't work would not have an effect of a vote as to whether to keep it???

 

It might have reinforced the need to update it if anything. It does work. It has been tested successfully 150 times. This time it didn't. So what?

 

 

Its not a deterrent if it doesn't work that one time you really need it to.

 

Ah, but they don't know it isn't going to work do they? Another reason why this shouldn't have been made public at all.

[the stinking enigma]

I hardly think that the fsb's main source of intelligence is the andrew marr show

[rmanx]

So the nations defence is to hope that know one finds out our nukes don't work, and if they do find out, hope we can fix it in time to vaporise some innocent people to avenge our dead innocent people?

 

Imagine the schools, hospitals, roads, etc, etc that could be funded with that money...

 

I bet some people have made some pretty coin off of Trident...or plastic form as it should be called for all the good it is.

[woolley]

Now you are just taking the intellectually bankrupt unilateralist line whereas mutually assured destruction has prevented wholesale war in Europe since 1945. You could fund schools, hospitals and roads with that money but look at what happened to the ones in Aleppo. Is that the future you advocate?

 

It's the liberal mindset again that views the world as we would all wish it to be and not as it actually is. Never let your guard down and you can live peacefully behind it.

[rmanx]

Now you are just taking the intellectually bankrupt unilateralist line whereas mutually assured destruction has prevented wholesale war in Europe since 1945. You could fund schools, hospitals and roads with that money but look at what happened to the ones in Aleppo. Is that the future you advocate?

 

It's the liberal mindset again that views the world as we would all wish it to be and not as it actually is. Never let your guard down and you can live peacefully behind it.

 

So all those countries without nukes...why do they constant appear in the top of lists like best education, healthcare, infrastructure etc?

 

We don't need nukes. Our poultry 150 versus the 1500+ of the US and Russia makes ours look like a bb gun next to a howitzer.

[woolley]

 

Now you are just taking the intellectually bankrupt unilateralist line whereas mutually assured destruction has prevented wholesale war in Europe since 1945. You could fund schools, hospitals and roads with that money but look at what happened to the ones in Aleppo. Is that the future you advocate?

 

It's the liberal mindset again that views the world as we would all wish it to be and not as it actually is. Never let your guard down and you can live peacefully behind it.

 

So all those countries without nukes...why do they constant appear in the top of lists like best education, healthcare, infrastructure etc?

 

We don't need nukes. Our poultry 150 versus the 1500+ of the US and Russia makes ours look like a bb gun next to a howitzer.

 

Poultry. How very apt.

 

You only need one if it hits the spot. And they never know that it won't.

[Andy Onchan]

 

Now you are just taking the intellectually bankrupt unilateralist line whereas mutually assured destruction has prevented wholesale war in Europe since 1945. You could fund schools, hospitals and roads with that money but look at what happened to the ones in Aleppo. Is that the future you advocate?

 

It's the liberal mindset again that views the world as we would all wish it to be and not as it actually is. Never let your guard down and you can live peacefully behind it.

 

So all those countries without nukes...why do they constant appear in the top of lists like best education, healthcare, infrastructure etc?

 

We don't need nukes. Our poultry 150 versus the 1500+ of the US and Russia makes ours look like a bb gun next to a howitzer.

 

 

Europe relies on NATO members (USA/UK/France) to provide the deterent for them.