Jump to content

news & politics:discussion


zahidf
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Serious shout out to watch this film...  Threads

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090163/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

Its utterly horrific but probably one of the best films ever to come out Britain.  Its forgotten to time largely because it was so terrifying at the time.

You have been warned.  Some of the scenes will live with you forever.  Highlights just how bad nuclear would be in a best case situation.

You don’t want to nuke Sheffield. You might end up improving the place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I will dumb it down for you because its clear you can't digest the message or your doing it to play games.

If two nations with nuclear weapons had a war it could quite easily escalate to the use of them.  e.g. Russia and the USA.  This has not happened because everyone fears this path of escalation.  Its totally unforeseeable the UK would of dropped a nuke on Argentina. 

You might not agree but don't waste our time by pretending you get the basic point around the nuclear deterrent. 

My point is what is even the point of having nuclear weapons if we will never ever use them. The idea that the only reason why we haven't been nuked is because we have nuclear weapons ourselves is something I take issue with, because there have been many nations that have engaged in conflict with nuclear armed countries and have not had a nuke dropped on them.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/14/nuclear-deterrence-myth-lethal-david-barash

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

You miss the point of MAD and nuclear weapons.  While I accept you might come to a different view point - using examples like the Falkland's war as a reason why they are pointless is really demonstrating you are missing the whole point.

Argentina  didn't have the capability of destroying the UK - they couldn't even keep hold of the island for very long.

So, you're saying that if we disarmed and got rid of our nuclear weapons, a country with nuclear weapons would launch one at us? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barry Fish said:

WW2 - USA drop two weapons on Japan to end the war and American lives.

The US did not need to drop those bombs tho, it was completely wrong that they did, there is heaps of evidence that shows that Japan was about to surrender anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Unfortunately Nicola Sturgeon was cleared. Was hoping and praying she would be found guilty. 

The so called independent lawyer has been an advisor to the snp since 2011. Swathes of the report are redacted.  Basically it’s like the snp marking their own homework. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

The so called independent lawyer has been an advisor to the snp since 2011. Swathes of the report are redacted.  Basically it’s like the snp marking their own homework. 

The voters won't score them fairly.

 

What did sturgeon say judge her on education I wish people would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

And heaps of evidence that one million extra yanks and Brits would have died.

don't know much about the history....but they came up with this because Japan wasn't surrendering and they had to invade Japan?

Did they really need to drop two bombs on different cities? Couldn't they drop somewhere unpopulated to show the potential? I guess only Japanese so doesn't really matter....

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

The voters won't score them fairly.

 

What did sturgeon say judge her on education I wish people would.

Sadly she leads a cult who thinks she can do nothing wrong rather than a political party. Her record on education is deplorable. The anti nationalist vote is split between the other three main parties. A few green msps are nationalist poodles and vote with the snp that keeps her in power.  

The scottish greens must be the only green party in the world that props up a government that would base its economy on a fossil fuel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

don't know much about the history....but they came up with this because Japan wasn't surrendering and they had to invade Japan?

Did they really need to drop two bombs on different cities? Couldn't they drop somewhere unpopulated to show the potential? I guess only Japanese so doesn't really matter....

I've got the same views as you but surely even if one was justified two wasn't? At least not for Japan- I presume America being the global power it is started then, showing the Soviets that they really were crazy enough to use these weapons 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

Sadly she leads a cult who thinks she can do nothing wrong rather than a political party. Her record on education is deplorable. The anti nationalist vote is split between the other three main parties. A few green msps are nationalist poodles and vote with the snp that keeps her in power.  

The scottish greens must be the only green party in the world that props up a government that would base its economy on a fossil fuel. 

Scottish greens advocate burning as much oil as possible.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Did they really need to drop two bombs on different cities? Couldn't they drop somewhere unpopulated to show the potential? I guess only Japanese so doesn't really matter....

To be fair, the Japanese still didn't surrender after the first one - so not sure that would have worked!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I've got the same views as you but surely even if one was justified two wasn't? At least not for Japan- I presume America being the global power it is started then, showing the Soviets that they really were crazy enough to use these weapons 

This is a good doc, it's on Netflix (the whole series is good - gives a decent refresher/overview).

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9103988/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Andre91 said:

If we fire first, it isn’t a deterrent. If we fire second, we’re up the creek already. 
 

NHS not Trident. 

The idea is that the nukes stop US getting fired at at all. Think of it as a national insurance policy.

 

The NHS is great, but it only really benefits sick people. EVERYONE benefits from trident. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...