| FAQ | 
| Members List | 
| Calendar | 
| Search | 
| Today's Posts | 
|  |  | 
| Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics. | 
| Register to reply Log in to reply | 
|  | Thread Tools | Display Modes | 
|  | 
|  23-03-2015, 11:09 PM | #1 | |||
| 
 | ||||
| self-oscillating | 
			
			Its not so much that the warheads have gone out of date, but delivery mechanisms and targetting will always need improving. Thats where the money goes. So the investment is more in those things which are applicable to many missile systems, not just nuclear. We already have more nuclear material than we could ever possibly need, and these days that production is relatively dirt cheap. If the politicians made this more clear, I think people would find it more acceptable. | |||
|   | 
|  23-03-2015, 11:14 PM | #2 | |||
| 
 | ||||
| Likes cars that go boom | 
			
			Oh god that old we need to update computer systems chestnut then? Look how inept they were at doing that in the welfare system! for gods sake I hope they don't ask IDS for advice we'll all be dust! 
				__________________   | |||
|   | 
|  24-03-2015, 07:57 PM | #3 | ||
| 
 | |||
| Senior Member | 
			
			^what Kirk said. Our country's defence is already depleated.Britain used to have the best navy in the world.In the Falklands in 1982 we apparently had access to 60 warships and frigates,Now we have 19 with only about 7 which will be deployable at one time.Our Army has been cut and will supposedly be down to 50,000 in the next four years.We need a nuclear deterent,Without it we will have hardly any political power on the world stage.Russia is modernising its military why the hell are we cutting ours? While nuclear weapons exist,We need them.While there is a possiblity countries like Iran have them or are close to having them,We need them.While North Korea have them,We need them.While there is any slight chance a terrorist could possibly make one,We need them. Our governments number one priority should be the protection and security of the British people. I certainly don't want to live in a weak defenceless country. Why should we have to rely on the US and France to defend us?Why not stand on our own two feet and take responsibility for our own defence.Why should other countries have to carry us? Last edited by Northern Monkey; 24-03-2015 at 08:00 PM. | ||
|   | 
|  24-03-2015, 07:58 PM | #4 | |||
| 
 | ||||
| Flag shagger. | 
			
			She should get rid of them all... the day after everyone else gets rid of theirs.
		 | |||
|   | 
|  25-03-2015, 12:25 PM | #5 | ||
| 
 | |||
| Senior Member | 
			
			Somebody has to take the first step. Nobody in possession of nuclear weapons is in any position to tell anybody to stop developing their nuclear capabilities. What right have Britain,America or anybody to throw their arms up in the air in disgust at Iran,North Korea or anybody for that matter for developing nuclear capabilities when we are in possession of enough to wipe any country off the face of the planet. Keep them and deal with the fact that everybody has the right to own them or get rid of them and gain the right to try and stop the development and ownership of them by anyone. There are a lot better minds than mine trying to answer the question keep or get rid but it doesn't take a genius to work out that unless somebody makes a brave first move to disarm then nobody will. I personally hope Britain can disarm and lead the way forward. Last edited by billy123; 25-03-2015 at 12:30 PM. | ||
|   | 
|  25-03-2015, 02:35 PM | #6 | ||
| 
 | |||
| Senior Member | 
			
			If it would cost billions I would rather see this money pumped into existing defenses, which have received pretty severe cuts under the current government.
		 | ||
|   | 
| Register to reply Log in to reply | 
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread | 
| Display Modes | |
| 
 | 
 |