Hiphip Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 @@GreenVision Maybe you should take the "political compass test" *** A lot of people seem fixated on a left or right stance when authoritarianism and libertarianism are ignored. Stalin and Mao Tse Tung were lefties remember. Cheers PS*** Political compass test is not to be taken to serious. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam-i-am Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 When they say nuclear disarment are you aware if that includes nuclear deterants ? What do we need a nuclear bomb for? Particularly since the very expensive ones we've got we can't use unless we ask the Americans for permission? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mephitis Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 i will be drawing a spurting cock and balls on my ballot paper. the trouble with ed analbeed, is that he thinks watered down tory policies are gonna win him support, but no one likes watered down tory policies, neither tory supporters or socialists. the labour party needs to throw caution to the wind, get shut of analbeed, balls and co, and become a real socialist party again. either that or the unions sever links and create a new socialist party. The unions should keep out of politics (as in taking sides between parties) and concentrate on what they are they for, protecting workers rights etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold Layne Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 From my PoV, cannabis is a non issue come election time. I believe there are bigger fish to fry, not this tiny weensy tiddler. Plus, I don't want legalisation (of weed use), so I vote on other issues. Things like world starvation, poverty, illegal wars..... things which piss all over my right to smoke weed, which is a non issue surely? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embryo Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold Layne Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 When they say nuclear disarment are you aware if that includes nuclear deterants ? That is what nuclear disarming means. We get rid of all our a nukes. And tell the Merkins to fuck off home with theirs too. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenVision Posted May 13, 2014 Author Share Posted May 13, 2014 That is what nuclear disarming means. We get rid of all our a nukes. And tell the Merkins to fuck off home with theirs too. I fully agree with this one, nuclear weapons are absolutely useless anyway, if the military wanted to strike a builidng in retaliation for some kind of reason then they could do it without nuclear power. In the event of a nuclear weapon being used, the chances of the enemy being the only people hurt or affected are errrmmm 0.0%. These so called clever folk never do learn, I think they should put down the nuclear pyhsics books and do a little studying on history. But what I meant was, haven't we got some kind of of submarine that can deflect incomming missiles or something ( not sure about this really ), So nuclear weapons definately need to go, but what I was wondering in that question was, would the anti-nuclear sub have to go with them. GV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenVision Posted May 13, 2014 Author Share Posted May 13, 2014 What do we need a nuclear bomb for? Particularly since the very expensive ones we've got we can't use unless we ask the Americans for permission? I don’t know politics very well, but I am quite in the know with science and physics. Knowing what a nuclear weapon is and how one works, and what it does, I can honestly say they are absolutely useless. The only time a nuclear weapon is any use would be on a very low yield device, which would then make it not worth the money to manufacture due to the cheaper options being able to create a larger effect on target. There are various non-nuclear missiles than can do just as much damage, on an explosion level. What I was trying to say was I would like to see nuclear weapons gone, as they really are useless, but nuclear deterrents kept in the country because not all world leaders share the UK's safer views on nuclear weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam-i-am Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 (edited) What I was trying to say was I would like to see nuclear weapons gone, as they really are useless, but nuclear deterrents kept in the country because not all world leaders share the UK's safer views on nuclear weapons. Nuclear deterrents is just another word for nuclear weapons to make them more palatable. Edited May 13, 2014 by sam-i-am Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenVision Posted May 13, 2014 Author Share Posted May 13, 2014 Nuclear deterrents is just another word for nuclear weapons to make them more palatable. I was under the impression that the submarine deterant was non-nuclear ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tico cervantes Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 A nuclear deterrent just means that "I have a nuke so don't fuck with me". As far as I know there is nothing that would take a nuke out once launched. I think that's what Americas star wars program was all about. The biggest problem with nukes is that they have not proved as a deterrent to "terror" as we had them all through the Irish troubles and we had them in 7/7 and America had them on 9/11 as well. So not a very good deterrent. Just a big fuck off expense. Also if we were "ruled" by a party that openly opposes the illegal wars that we are in and pulled out fully and unreservedly leaving nothing but compensation and apologies. Then held those that were responsable for these illegal wars accountable for what they did then do you realy think we would be the target of any future attacks? (not that I think this will happen but it's what I would do if I was in power). There were no Islamic terror attacs on British soil until we got involved with the yanks illegal wars. So the solution to this "problem" is not to invade countries. Simple. As for the election I will be voting green in the euro elections and I will be voting yes in the Scottish referendum so as for the general election I will wait and see. Cheers tico. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Degsy Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 I was under the impression that the submarine deterant was non-nuclear ? Trident missiles are submarine based Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam-i-am Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 The deterrent is what was once called MAD standing for mutually assured destruction. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Stoker Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Have any mentioned the subject, reducing to class C for example. It can be any class they fucking like, my jars won't be any more full or empty based on some horse shit arbitrary class system, dreamed up by a bunch of useless cunts. In fact, I'm going to double the amount of cannabis in my house, just out of spite. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenVision Posted May 13, 2014 Author Share Posted May 13, 2014 It can be any class they fucking like, my jars won't be any more full or empty based on some horse shit arbitrary class system, dreamed up by a bunch of useless cunts. In fact, I'm going to double the amount of cannabis in my house, just out of spite. Fair enough, but surely it would be better to get a fine and discharge or community service then go inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now