[Closed] Is May about to call an election?

[quote=jam bo ]the ninfan bot isn't about being right, just winding up 'lefties'

THIS he is not even very right win and does not agree with most of what he says its just for the reaction. Often he is well informed and sourced so he is no dumb trolbot I will give him that

You cannot win a debate with him unless he fails to wind you up.

I see him as a bit of a silly barrack room lawyer.

I used to manage dozens of people like him - or at least like he comes across. Don't get wound up and arguing with them is quite a fun way to pass the time.

not a policy commitment.

Whoever claimed that it was?

Or had you forgotten that Corbyns personal position on Nukes was opposite to party policy

[img] [/img]

Fighting a losing battle there Klunk. The discussion has moved onto the extremely difficult subject of whether it's a good or bad thing to kill billions of people and bring about the end of civilisation as we know it. We probably need to wait for the unhinged psychopaths to bugger off before we can actually discuss anything of relevance or importance.

> Ninfan
As you are here, to save all this arguing around the subject of what is and isn't right in nuclear exchanges, pretend you have recently been elected Prime Minister.

Write your letter to the Vanguard submarine commanders detailing what to do in the event of Britain falling victim to a nuclear attack and the government being dead and post it here. I'm genuinely interested to hear what you have to say.

Assume that each warhead is 100 kilotonnes and if used in ground burst mode to penetrate bunkers will kill everyone in a 3km radius and cause fallout of sufficient severity to cause lethal radiation sickness 15-25km from the blast site depending on wind direction and strength with 25% fatalities up to 80km from the site of impact in the direction of the prevailing wind. Each sub has 48 warheads, one sub is on patrol and can retaliate instantly, 2 others are armed but generally on 48 hours and 2 weeks emergency deployment notice.

Remember, you can't assume that they will come from a particular country.

No name calling now Daz this is the war room

Wouldn't? Corbin have to ask Trump's permission anyway? Trump ain't going to let anyone nuke Putin....we are relying on France sheild now.

Wouldn't? Corbin have to ask Trump's permission anyway? Trump ain't going to let anyone nuke Putin....we are relying on France sheild now.

What if it was trump nuking us. Via a misspelt tweet

Entirely possible...but a military takeover of UK not necessary, last 12months has shown it's just far easier for a foreign power to buy a country

Can someone give a real world scenario where you would press the button and nuke a couple of million people?

Denial of pudding

Nuclear weapons for the base idiot is like having a massive penis, they wa the one, think they know what to do with one but in reality have nothing. Act like a superpower but have nothing to back it up. Sad little people really who deserve some pity.

😯

Can someone give a real world scenario where you would press the button and nuke a couple of million people?

Maybe if I was Donald Trump and I was in a bad mood with the world because they don't say nice things about me.

Give it 6 months and threating to nuke Brussels will be part of our Brexit negotiating strategy

seosamh77 - Member
Can someone give a real world scenario where you would press the button and nuke a couple of million people?

Some of the overreactions are really dramatic ... 😆

overreactions

What level of reaction is appropriate for murdering millions of people and destroying industrialised society?

As long as we nuke Chewk's Zombie Mayggot I don't mind.

for murdering millions of people and destroying industrialised society?

Shows the demented mindset of the unilateralists - they just don't get that retaining the nuclear deterrent is about [b]avoiding[/b] exactly that outcome.

I've spent my whole life being told Nuclear war and devestation was not only inevitable but imminent due to the 'warmongering' ways of the west. The end of the Cold War and huge steps towards [u]multilateral[/u] nuclear disarmament have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they were utterly, utterly wrong.

dazh - Member

overreactions

What level of reaction is appropriate for murdering millions of people and destroying industrialised society?

zippykona - Member
As long as we nuke Chewk's Zombie Mayggot I don't mind.

Zombie Mayggot 8)

Like it.

ninfan - Member

The end of the Cold War and huge steps towards multilateral nuclear disarmament have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they were utterly, utterly wrong.

I'm pretty sure Jeremy Corbyn was saying multilateral disarmament is the way forward. So does that mean you're in agreement with him?

Write your letter to the Vanguard submarine commanders detailing what to do in the event of Britain falling victim to a nuclear attack and the government being dead and post it here. I'm genuinely interested to hear what you have to say...
...Remember, you can't assume that they will come from a particular country.

"Dear commander, if you are reading this, then it is to my great regret that the United Kingdom, our home country, has been destroyed. My orders are as follows: Nuke France, Nuke Germany, Nuke Spain - save one for Argentina, and if you have anything left over, Nuke Scotland, just to make sure"

Wouldn't? Corbin have to ask Trump's permission anyway?

Can someone give a real world scenario where you would press the button and nuke a couple of million people?

igm - Member
Zombie Mayggot
Like it.

Trademark infringement that ... 😆

I'm pretty sure Jeremy Corbyn was saying multilateral disarmament is the way forward. So does that mean you're in agreement with him?

Corbyn has been a lifelong advocate of unilateral nuclear disarmament, It seems his Party however, are not.

Nuclear weapons make us feel better about slaughtering people in war zones using so called "conventional weapons". We find it easier to accept the utter horrors of "conventional warfare" as it could be worse, at least it's not nuclear.

We have become desensitised to the actual effects of any type of warfare in the modern age as 24 hour news channels push it down our throats on loop. Our children play computer games "Call of Duty" and "Battlefield" at an early age which further reinforces the desensitisation.

As a child my Grandfather shared with me some of the appalling things he had seen happen whilst serving in the Royal Navy during WW2. Not just things carried out by the Nazi's and there allies but by British soldiers and sailors and our allies.

War zone deaths just become meaningless statistics in the present day. It's easy to be flippant about killing other human beings when you do not have to see it first hand.

"Dear commander, if you are reading this, then it is to my great regret that the United Kingdom, our home country, has been destroyed. My orders are as follows: Nuke France, Nuke Germany, Nuke Spain - save one for Argentina, and if you have anything left over, Nuke Scotland, just to make sure"

Very good, nice to see a sense of humour (although for some reason I'd assumed Brussels would be on your list), but I was being serious. You say you are prepared to use them - how [u]exactly[/u]?

Maybe a good question for chewkw too.

Hmm.. so even if May wins but loses the majority, do we think she'll quit?

Who was being humorous?

so even if May wins but loses the majority, do we think she'll quit?

She'll be hung out to dry as the leader of a lame-duck minority govt until the tory power brokers can decide on a successor. That will be her punishment for the cluserf*** she has presided over. Amber Rudd would seem like the ideal replacement but I doubt she'll be brexit enough for the nutters. If it does end up as a hung parliament (unlikely I think) then political chaos will ensue. It could even spell the end of brexit for there's no way any govt could negotiate it with the threat of a no confidence vote hanging over them.

[quote=molgrips ]Hmm.. so even if May wins but loses the majority, do we think she'll quit?

Almost certainly - she doesn't even look like she wants it most of the time any more, and she'd surely know that she's on borrowed time - jump or get pushed. The Tory paymasters wouldn't want her around any more.

We have become desensitised to the actual effects of any type of warfare in the modern age as 24 hour news channels push it down our throats on loop. Our children play computer games "Call of Duty" and "Battlefield" at an early age which further reinforces the desensitisation.

Something i remember from a fair while ago, if you look at the movies from just after ww2, they tended to avoid the carnage, no one really wanted to see reality, to close to home, too many knew what war meant. Now decades since the last real war, people have forgotten what it means. Ex para i knew who had been in the falklands, he refused to talk, too many friends killed in front of him. Nothing about it was "fun"

Comments about hung parliament seem very relevant - every poll so far is either conservative win or no overall majority. None have shown a labour win far as I know.

Hung parliament not really going to help brexit process which has now been started - what happens then?

I've spent my whole life being told Nuclear war and devestation was not only inevitable but imminent due to the 'warmongering' ways of the west

Poor child - who on earth were you brought up by? They have a lot to answer for and it explains your warped view of the world. I only hope you can find peace and forgive them.

Hung parliament not really going to help brexit process which has now been started - what happens then?

Potentially negotiation becomes untenable and it stops.

On May, is it possible that she's actually a secret remainer pitching for a hung parliament that will kill Brexit. I like a good take of conspiracy me.

Not so sure on a hung parliament it gives hte opportunity to get all the parties involved in Brexit then we can pick the talent not the party hierarchy.

TBH its not like the cabinet never mind the tory party speaks with one voice- I am not even sure the three brexiteers and May speak with one voice on the issue

AC blog today.

http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blog/2017/06/03/not-going-to-say-told-you-so-mrs-may-oh-i-just-did/

if you look at the movies from just after ww2, they tended to avoid the carnage, no one really wanted to see reality, to close to home, too many knew what war meant

Seen Night Will Fall?

On May, is it possible that she's actually a secret remainer pitching for a hung parliament that will kill Brexit. I like a good take of conspiracy me.

if that was the case she would have called the election before invoking article 50.

Happily - when they've just done it to us.

So we have been attacked and a couple of nuclear weapons have wiped out the UK. You suggest we then retaliate (even though all UK people are dead/dying) and kill millions more innocent people. How does that help, what do you gain from doing that?

(Remember, you are not killing the nutter who sent the bombs our way, you are killing innocent people who had nothing to do with it other than live in the country of the nutter.)

How does that help, what do you gain from doing that?

Don't be daft, we're dealing with schoolyard machismo played out with nuclear bombs. You really think he gives a shit about the lives of millions of innocent foreigners?

Nope. He's a Brexy. Foreigners aren't real people to him.

So we have been attacked and a couple of nuclear weapons have wiped out the UK

Your mathematics and understanding of the effects of Nuclear weapons are woefully inadequate to the point of childishness.

A couple of nuclear weapons exploding, even in large cities would be devestating, terrible, horrific - but they most certianly would not result in "all UK people are dead/dying"

Huge amounts of work was done on this in the Cold War - exercises like Hard Rock and Square Leg, which was predicated on a 200 MT, 130 odd warhead exchange hitting the UK, and even that got nowhere near your "all UK people are dead/dying"

Maybe go away and learn something about it before spouting the type of alarmist, naive crap that you get from Momentum websites.

To be honest, in terms of the wars you might conceivably use nukes in, the world is very peaceful at present. Now I agree that Brexit makes such wars slightly more rather than slightly less likely, but the EU is looking pretty strong without us (possibly stronger) so no worries just yet.

Asking Corbyn whether he's going to use nukes is therefore ultimately irrelevant.