 |
|
| Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics. |
| View Poll Results: public services or nuclear weapons? | ||||||
| Public Services |
   
|
12 | 92.31% | |||
|
||||||
| Nuclear Weapons |
  
|
1 | 7.69% | |||
|
||||||
| Voters: 13. You may not vote on this poll | ||||||
| Register to reply Log in to reply |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
30-11-2015, 10:52 AM
|
#30 | |||
|
||||
|
Likes cars that go boom
|
'The cost of ensuring an up to date nuclear deterrent might be indecently high, but the cost of NOT having one WILL one day be fatally imeasurable and unthinkable.'
Well yes 40 billion is the estimated figure, as heard on question time. It was intimated that in order to provide it services may suffer, that was the whole crux of my question. It's not idiotic to attempt to predict who is for a total replacement of a nuclear deterrent and who isn't due to the affectation of public services, due to the impact of such measures. There is a live chat about it at 12 today if anyone is interested. http://www.theguardian.com/society-p...vices-livechat
__________________
|
|||
|
| Register to reply Log in to reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode