Jump to content

Scottish Independence


xbl

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 16.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yes. Do you have any others that provide evidence to the contrary?

You claimed that it was a good post - the one from robbiesmaw - was that you just trolling again?

My "evidence" is that Ireland is a shithole.

And if you take the Salmond slur out it was a very solid post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My "evidence" is that Ireland is a shithole.

And if you take the Salmond slur out it was a very solid post

Good evidence, well played.

It was an utterly, utterly dreadful post. This is why you should wait for H_B and Ad Lib to post first before jumping in with original thoughts of your own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said that it's not inconceivable that a country like Libya, which was hostile to us, and tried over decades to develop/procure both nuclear weapon technology and intermediate ballistic missiles, could possibly be countered with the threat of Trident. I don't think that's hugely outlandish.

.

In what way could Trident counter a rogue nation of the kind that you describe?

In what way is a weapons system designed to counter Russia useful against other threats?

It's not nonsense, it's a legitimate question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Odd example there. The choice of killing millions... is like Don's strikeforce.

Fine. A different analogy.

I think Trident is immoral and a waste of money, but I still believe there are situations where it could be useful. In a similar way I believe the government's extended surveillance powers are wrong, even though I accept that they could make the jobs of the security services easier.

In both cases I do think there are decent arguments for Trident/extra anti-terror powers, but I think the negatives outweigh the positives.

I'm not for Trident, I think we should ditch it. I just don't agree that it's completely pointless.

I think that the WoS article that was put up was pretty poorly argued, that's how this all starts.

I'm not suggesting we should go out and drop nuclear bombs on Tripoli.

I don't think David Goodwillie would be an effective first strike weapon in the event of war with Russia (unless Russia was hammered and wearing a mini-skirt).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that the expected turn out for the referendum will be a maximum of 75-80% meaning that more than 1 million people in Scotland that won't vote in the referendum.

All these shrivelled, old pensioners that are planning to vote No won't be able to make it.

#yasyes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In what way could Trident counter a rogue nation of the kind that you describe?

In what way is a weapons system designed to counter Russia useful against other threats?

It's not nonsense, it's a legitimate question.

You could use it as a threat against rogue nations with less effective defences and smaller WMD arsenals.

The Eurofighter is a weapons system designed to fight Russia. Our Challenger tanks are designed to fight Russia. Our entire military has been geared for decades with a view to fighting Russia. That doesn't mean that it's incapable of doing anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, I've said that repeatedly. I just thought that the article was flawed.

It was like me saying "I don't want David Goodwillie at Aberdeen because he'll be useless if we ever play Real Madrid." I don't actually want Goodwille, but I think that that's a stupid reason.

No, you're saying we should hang on to Messi because he might do a job against East Fife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could use it as a threat against rogue nations with less effective defences and smaller WMD arsenals.

The Eurofighter is a weapons system designed to fight Russia. Our Challenger tanks are designed to fight Russia. Our entire military has been geared for decades with a view to fighting Russia. That doesn't mean that it's incapable of doing anything else.

The bang up job they did in Iraq and Afghanistan says you're wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could use it as a threat against rogue nations with less effective defences and smaller WMD arsenals.

Yay! Trillions of quid for a bullying threat that we can never use!

I'm going to spend next month's wages getting several football hooligans to threaten a toddler. Just for the lulz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yay! Trillions of quid for a bullying threat that we can never use!

I'm going to spend next month's wages getting several football hooligans to threaten a toddler. Just for the lulz.

Clearly you've missed the half a dozen times on this thread where I've said I'd ditch Trident if it was up to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly you've missed the half a dozen times on this thread where I've said I'd ditch Trident if it was up to me.

Well, there's one way I know that we can do that. Shall I tell you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is no - one else surprised by the seethe alex salmond inspires? I thought it was pretty much agreed that the SNP have been good for this country. He is a very good politician and when compared to Osborne, clegg, ed etc seems reasonably normal/likeable. What is it about him that gets people so wound up?

He is a pretty cocky guy I suppose, which can be an offputting characteristic. I quite admire it at times tbh, a lot of the media he deals with outwith Scotland is pretty patronising a lot of the time so I quite like is "you're basically a bit of a bellend aren't you" counter-patronising tone.

Think him being a bit cocksure drives a lot of people to a state of complete rage because generally speaking up for Scotland and disputing the idea that we're incapable beggers really offends some people's sensibilities. Think a good proportion of the Scottish population think the likes of Cameron and Miliband are cretinous arseholes but it's nice and comfy to have them there to look up at and dislike a bit. Salmond's one of these uppity Jocks who doesn't know his place with his "we could actually create something better for ourselves" nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is no - one else surprised by the seethe alex salmond inspires? I thought it was pretty much agreed that the SNP have been good for this country. He is a very good politician and when compared to Osborne, clegg, ed etc seems reasonably normal/likeable. What is it about him that gets people so wound up?

As Sodje said, it's because he talks up Scotland. Some people just can't take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine. A different analogy.

I think Trident is immoral and a waste of money, but I still believe there are situations where it could be useful. In a similar way I believe the government's extended surveillance powers are wrong, even though I accept that they could make the jobs of the security services easier.

In both cases I do think there are decent arguments for Trident/extra anti-terror powers, but I think the negatives outweigh the positives.

I'm not for Trident, I think we should ditch it. I just don't agree that it's completely pointless.

I think that the WoS article that was put up was pretty poorly argued, that's how this all starts.

I'm not suggesting we should go out and drop nuclear bombs on Tripoli.

I don't think David Goodwillie would be an effective first strike weapon in the event of war with Russia (unless Russia was hammered and wearing a mini-skirt).

It is not useful. It may give Tories prestige, but does nowt for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...