[Kyle]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

A lot of nationalists and patriots would suggest otherwise. Undoubtedly, there are some instances when war may have been a better option - World War Two for example. If more lives could have been saved with war then it would obviously be the better option. Other methods could have also done the same and much better, but they didn't happen so we wouldn't know.

You can be as anti-war as you want mate but in this day and age the U.K (or a European superstate as we are exploring here) need a standing army. I'm afraid cannons full of daffodils and hugs aren't a very effective defence method.

[JoshBB]

Originally Posted by Kyle

You can be as anti-war as you want mate but in this day and age the U.K (or a European superstate as we are exploring here) need a standing army. I'm afraid cannons full of daffodils and hugs aren't a very effective defence method.

No, but boycotts & cutting supplies are. Preventing overseas electricity and blocking tourists from entering the country would also damage business.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

No, but boycotts & cutting supplies are. Preventing overseas electricity and blocking tourists from entering the country would also damage business.

Very valid points. Thought provoking.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kyle

You can be as anti-war as you want mate but in this day and age the U.K (or a European superstate as we are exploring here) need a standing army. I'm afraid cannons full of daffodils and hugs aren't a very effective defence method.

What an image this conjured up.