1. Don’t cover bikes.
2. Lack of ventilation.

Only level 62 …….

turn the slow/fast adjuster to faster?

runs the entire maths curriculum for the school and is has been picked to be one of the lead teachers in the school for the quality of her lessons

This could be the issue because and

She won’t take time off work

Whilst the GP is important to see she will need to address the root cause of the problem. It maybe she lacks the ability to delegate and manage the work load. This drives a fear of failure that manifests itself as not taking time off or calling oneself a perfectionist. This seemingly hard work ethic often hides these types of problems. They often work long hours and work very hard. She should speak to the head of the school and discuss this and get help and mentoring otherwise the help provided by the doctor will just mask the underlying problem.

This will be the very thing she wont want to discuss with the school.

I got my frame warranty done through LBS not the shop who sold it to me, they contacted SC and 4 weeks later new frame! So along as you have receipts your fine.

I know hindsight is a wonderful thing, but doesn’t that pretty much invalidate everything else you say?

nope, I’m not against coalition’s. I’d hope for a good stronger government with a majority to get policies through. It was if you like a form of PR, I take your point. More voters got represented. Just think a lot of the minority parties getting seats just confuse and slow down the process of good government without adding any value as well adding a huge administrative and financial burden.

Way OT sorry

2 bed, I pay £58 month duel fuel, Id suggest you look at your consumption, check the meter reading and send in updated reading online.

not in favour of PR, I’d rather have strong government of whatever flavour. Cant see that PR governments are better. Whilst we can look to other countries where it has worked or failed it doesn’t mean its right for this country. No two countries are the same. Why do we need PR, aren’t the Liberia’s the natural home of centralist voters?

I was in favour of the coalition for the Liberals I thought it would give them a chance, after years in the wilderness, to be part of the decision making process and deliver their polices.

The British public thought otherwise. I thought any chance of getting your policies delivered would have been good. The alternative was to never deliver anything for your supporters. But it wasn’t seen like that.

I didn’t vote liberal BTW. Id suggest most centralists wouldn’t either.

remove core and reverb syringe works

I upgraded to safe faf and spill to

http://nextdaytyres.co.uk/details.aspx/STANS-NO-TUBES-THE-INJECTOR/133

Yup and Margret Beckets report doesn’t shy away from the issues. Not least of which is the change in social population towards more pensioners.

Labour needs to change radically. It needs to win votes and for that you have to drop the idological policies for ones people will vote for. I saw this is comment JC as simply another own goal. I had some respect for his principled stands up to now only to see him throw it all away.

Certainly agree we wouldn’t of used them, I was just surprised we had any even on the RFAs. Given it was SOP to sail with them on board you’d have thought someone would have had them unloaded but guess there wasn’t the time.

I suggest you check:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/dec/06/military.freedomofinformation
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WE.177
Royal Marines have nothing to do with nuclear weapons unless their guarding them.

scotroutes.

pawsy bear sends

•Emergency Action Message (EAM)!

mute point really as Labour wont be in government to influence the outcome one way or the other

wouldn’t buy house with no internet

Top tip is to alter your pace, slow down if your heating up and go faster if your cold.

spesh defrosters
Endura singletrack II trousers – ideal, breathable
Endura waterproof jacket – has pit zips quite good and 100% waterproof http://www.endurasport.com/products/?ProductID=14&initcode=E9048R
merino base layer
buff for head

I carry extra top just in case, fully waterproof stuff just makes you boil

realistically in the worse conditions your going to get soaked so turbo is the only option :-D and wait for a better day

You’re suggesting handing them over to the RAF and only to be used Monday to Friday 9-5 (early finish on Friday)?

you know the RAF well then ….. ;-D

and only if they can live in 5 star hotel :-D

I assume that ‘relating to the conduct of armed conflict’ covers the whole spectrum of weapons in a conflict, conventional, chemical and biological. A catch all phrase.

Current policy specifically states that it does not rule out a first use and includes using weapons in support of NATO, allies and our other defence treaties.

Having a written policy gives credibility to the deterrence

we deliberately maintain some ambiguity about precisely when, how and at what scale we would contemplate use of our nuclear deterrent. We do not want to simplify the calculations of a potential aggressor by defining more precisely the circumstances in which we might consider the use of our nuclear capabilities (for example, we do not define what we consider to be our vital interests), hence, we will not rule in or out the first use of nuclear weapons

UK does not require US or NATO authorisation to use its deterrent

The UK has long been clear that we would only consider using nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances of self-defence, including the defence of our NATO Allies, and in accordance with our international legal obligations, including those relating to the conduct of armed conflict.

Ukraine isn’t part of NATO or anything else.

They were unaligned, thus Billy no mates. Harsh world out there. Worth noting if you plan to lead a country.

Ukraine applied to join the NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) in 2008. Plans for NATO membership were shelved by Ukraine following the 2010 presidential election in which Viktor Yanukovych, who preferred to keep the country non-aligned, was elected President.

The point I was making that should there be a limited conflict in some region like the Pacific a reciprocal alliance would put us in the firing line. Made all the more dangerous by potential Presidents like Donal Trump, hardly a dove. This is destabilising and increases tension around the world. It does not follow that there would global thermo nuclear war.

Yes I would support staying out of a conflict between US and China over Tiawan as would Russia and France I suspect.
True were straying off the point.

Yup agree, self interest would be a large factor and I wouldn’t blame them for putting themselves first. I guess those that that think such an alliance would be a good idea with someone like Donal Trump consider him a sane rational politician and are forgetting such alliances are reciprocal! So should the US be involved in a conflict we’d have to support them or by being in the alliance a target. Remember Cuba? No threat to the UK but we were on full nuclear alert.

I believe the Asian Pacific rim is most likely scenario for conflict. China building islands and expanding its national sea borders. Conflict with Japan over islands. Over flights by US bombers. NZ and Australia closely linked to the UK. People have a limited view of where the threat lies. Who’d have guessed an assassination in the Balkans would ignite a world war

Time to check our alliances in that area.

Why not use Hilka greese gun and greese? Works a treat. Easy to get greese via Amazon etc.

One thing I initial had a problem was pumping greese into one of the bearings. Easy solution, deflate shock. Greese went straight in. Since then it’s not needed that. Greese goes in both easy.

I’ve got that one, works a treat to blast those damn tubeless tyres! Not used the rest of the stuff. I bought it to blow up tyres.

would America come to our aid in the next war?

Joined WW1 1917
Joined WW2 Dec 41

It could be argued that they were a tad late as the kick off was 1939 and WW1 ended in 1918.

And for clarity it was way after these dates that they actual took action.

Just for balance, best to look at facts rather than making it up. All those that say we don’t need our deterent. Are you absolutely sure in this world of geopolitics. China expansion, North Korea, Iran, Russia invasion of Ukraine and. Crimea. To name a few.

Remember under NATO an attack on one is an attack on all. We deployed troops to the Baltic states last year, the trip wire. We could be dragged into another conflict? Turkey shoots down Russian plane, Russia retaliates. Wars have begun that way.

Vxrob agreed, mentions punching above our weight

If Corbyn had said I’m scrapping Trident and nuclear weapons and will invest the X billions in NHS, education, infrastructure etc etc it would I feel have been attractive to the voters. And would I think have won votes. But the current proposal has all the costs and none of the benefits and as such is unconvincing and I think a vote loser.

Except it’s been known since the 90’s that it’s a bit of a stretch of imagination that the deterrent is totally secure from being pre-emptively taken out.

I’m sure no deterent is 100%. But all the major protagonist have invested in this method. I’m sure none of us really knows how secure it is. But given everyone is doing it then it leads me to think that it’s still the best option.

I mean, who would have noticed another madman round here? Captain Blackadder: [whistle blows] Good luck, …

Ha ha ha yeah nickc

What a great footnote in History to leave, “Britain was evaporated, but in the world’s most pointless and futile gesture it annihilated millions of innocent civilians in a desperate act of vengeance, and even more of earth was rendered uninhabitable thanks to the most ridiculous act of petulance the world has ever seen”

Unfortunately that’s about right. The reason for hiding your nuclear deterent somewhere deep in the Atlantic or wherever is that it will survive a pre emptive strike designed to destroy our nuclear forces before they can retaliate. Thus they can’t be sure they will destroy your nuclear forces and we will have the option to strike back. QED MAD and deterrence. We all sincirely hope the deterent affect works which is why it needs to remain credible or you should scrap all your weapons and save the cash.

No they don’t have any control over ours. The decision to fire can be made by the submarine Captain using the authority of the final letter which the Prime Minister alone writes and is carried in each boat.

Our weapons are under NATO command but w still have the final say or can withdraw them from their use if we feel it’s in the national interest.

Nickc

Yes but why would we now, knowing Corbyn would not put nuclear weapons in them and not pull the trigger, spend the huge amount of money to deploy a less than best solution?

Why not buy another couple of Astute subs? His policy, cancel Trident replacement completely, is at least rational. Saddling us with a number of huge expensive submarines duplicating existing capabilities just doesn’t make sense. Unless as dragon says above, he’s trying auto appease everyone?

Tornado GR1 was still carrying free fall nuclear bombs until 1998.

Agree with dragon.

Not true RAF continued with a nuclear delivery role.

Main reason was sound, manned bombers were unlikely to penetrate Russian airspace and deliver their weapons. Also aircraft were likely to be destroyed in a first strike. ICBMs in subs pretty much undetectable and safe from nuclear first strike and so was a credible deterrent.

Our deterent is independent. We just use thier systems. They have no control over our systems. IMHO if your going to go nuclear and can buy off the shelf then you save a lot of tax payers money.

Vulcans and Victors continued on in RAF service way past there sell by date as tankers and bombing the Falklands

Time for Dr. Strangelove

Dr. Strangelove recommends that the President gather several hundred thousand people to live in deep mineshafts where the radiation will not penetrate. He suggests a 10:1 female-to-male ratio for a breeding program to repopulate the Earth when the radiation has subsided.

Turgidson, worried that the Soviets will do the same, warns about a “mineshaft gap”

:-D

I should add that spy satellite’s were just being used at this point. They got a very good shot of the airfield and could count them on the ground all lined up :-D

But not to worry, their bombs didn’t have any nuclear warheads anyway – hopefully… sorry couldn’t resist

Isn’t it what Russia sort of did in the cold war. (They had a few proper ones but rather exaggerated the number that actually worked)

They flew their strategic bombers over Red Square in a continuous loop during a May Day parade to make the west think they had lots. Subsequent satellite photography showed the true number. Remember deception is part of the art of war.

That ‘idiotic’ that the warmongery Yanks are trying develop something similar?
Latest ‘anti Corbyn mindless ranting’ I think you mean.

no idea what your talking about please try in plain English? What American new design? They having a huge fleet of ICBM boats aren’t about to follow Corbyn defence policy from the hip.

Why would he announce such a thing, because the Americans are developing their own new non nuclear missile submarines? This is news. Please explain.