Comrade Corbyn silly remarks / Trident

[Conniff]

Knowing Corbyn he will let the public decide through a Referendum

 

How quick can we arrange a referendum and get the result, it don't take long for a missile to get here, do you think we will have time.

[obiter dictum]

If nukes come our way Nato will respond in kind

 

We do not need a deterrent

 

We cannot even defend our own air space, those russian bombers over the north sea destroyed that myth

 

They only had to drop one thermo nuclear device and it would have taken out southern england and most of northern europe

Edited September 30, 2015 by obiter dictum

[Conniff]

But we won't get any coming our way, that is what a 'deterrent' is for.

 

The Russians are 'not' penetrating our airspace.

 

If they drop one thermo nuclear device, they will get dozens back from Trident hidden somewhere in the Oceans which is why it's call a deterrent.

[obiter dictum]

13 mile limit as to air space and soverign territory?

 

 

One thermo nuclear device will leave a crater 25 miles wide and a fire storm hotter than the sun for 120 miles

 

They do not need to penetrate our air space

[SabreSheep]

You are purposely missing the point and adding things on.

 

"Going back to my earlier post, why sit down with the family and discuss getting a motorhome if the driver says, before that discussion, he will 'not' drive it."

 

I will believe you know Corbyn when you post up a picture of the two of you having a pint together.

 

 

Because the motor home is being brought for the family for family use and others can be given the ability to drive it.

[obiter dictum]

We are in the 21st century

 

Not the 1950s

 

Though the thinking is still the 1950s

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCIQyCkwAGoVChMIqPHy95ifyAIVSBMaCh2S8A8i&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DIKqXu-5jw60&usg=AFQjCNFFt_E2tAic9wHDmBEI8l_AzkqbJw&bvm=bv.103627116,d.d24

[unclebulgaria67]

But we won't get any coming our way, that is what a 'deterrent' is for.

 

The Russians are 'not' penetrating our airspace.

 

If they drop one thermo nuclear device, they will get dozens back from Trident hidden somewhere in the Oceans which is why it's call a deterrent.

 

Providing the submarines are working. To have a permanent at sea nuclear option, you need to have 4 subs. We are not certain at the moment how many we will have.

 

There was a recent picture of one of the subs in a harbour in the middle east having works done. There have been periods where no sub has been operational.

 

Having one base at Faslane is not good either. Ideally you would want several base options. Once Cameron has managed to get the UK out of the EU, Scotland will vote for independence and a new sub base will be needed. The only viable option is Plymouth.

 

There are many defence experts who are critical of the Tories spending, based on money and not requirements. Having no current aircraft carriers to fly fighter jets from and the new carriers not being operational for years is embarrasing to the Royal Navy.

[obiter dictum]

Another point to mention

 

Once a sub has launched it will be destroyed as it will be immediately detected

 

Each Trident sub carries 16 missiles

 

Each missile carries 12 independently targetable nuclear warheads. (MIRV)

 

So that is a total launched in one go will be 192 independent targeted , or cities wiped off the face of the planet

 

And the russian subs will do exactly the same to us

 

Currently the yanks and soviets have about 5000 nukes each

 

MAD

Edited September 30, 2015 by obiter dictum

[estellyn]

a discussion can be had in order to help others make a decision as to which side they support - people discussing the pros and cons of each side can be informing and help an individual develop an informed opinion on the matter. This is what Corbyn wants, and I'm sure people who hold a differing opinion.

 

My view is that Trident is expensive - very, very expensive, and we're a small country who can ill afford it. We're part of Nato and are protected by the many, many nuclear weapons that the U.S. have. Money used for Trident could be better used. It seems we have it so we can belong to an elite club, which is a bad reason.

 

Once the first nuclear weapon is used, it's bound to be followed by more - regardless of what the UK decided, if the French and U.S. disagreed, they would likely act unilaterally anyway. The world be a pretty crappy place after nuclear weapons are used, there would never be just one or two.

 

I appreciate a politician who states what he believes rather than the majority opinion of a poll or focus group, even if I disagree with their opinion. I'm fed up of sanitised, spun, political bullc**p that has become the norm.

[Conniff]

Another point to menion

 

Once a sub has launched it will be destroyed as it will be immediately detected

 

Each Trident sub carries 16 missiles

 

Each missile carries 12 independently targetable nuclear warheads. (MIRV)

 

So that is a total launched in one go will be 192 independent targeted , or cities wiped off the face of the planet

 

And the russian subs will do exactly the same to us

 

Currently the yanks and soviets have about 5000 nukes each

 

MAD

 

It matters not how many each have. We carry 12 missilse with 16 warheads in each, that will take out most of Russian.

 

The submarine will not be immediately destroyed, I can say with certainty that I know more about submarines than you.

 

Other threads are being shut down because they are going off topic, this one is being 'deliberately' taken off topic.

 

It has nothing to do with missiles and blowing up half the country, it is as the heading suggest Corbyn and his silly saying

 

You can't have a discussion about something when you have made up your mind beforehand.

Edited September 30, 2015 by Conniff

[obiter dictum]

Spy satellites will pick up any launch through heat signatures

The yanks have NORAD, the soviets similar anywhere on the planet, no doubt the chinese as well

They pick up any surface launch Instantaneously and reactive procedures put into place until identified

 

What corbyn is saying is not silly

 

It makes perfect sense

 

He will not push the button

 

HE WILL LEAVE THAT UP TO NATO

[Conniff]

a discussion can be had in order to help others make a decision as to which side they support - people discussing the pros and cons of each side can be informing and help an individual develop an informed opinion on the matter. This is what Corbyn wants, and I'm sure people who hold a differing opinion.

 

My view is that Trident is expensive - very, very expensive, and we're a small country who can ill afford it. We're part of Nato and are protected by the many, many nuclear weapons that the U.S. have. Money used for Trident could be better used. It seems we have it so we can belong to an elite club, which is a bad reason.

 

Once the first nuclear weapon is used, it's bound to be followed by more - regardless of what the UK decided, if the French and U.S. disagreed, they would likely act unilaterally anyway. The world be a pretty crappy place after nuclear weapons are used, there would never be just one or two.

 

I appreciate a politician who states what he believes rather than the majority opinion of a poll or focus group, even if I disagree with their opinion. I'm fed up of sanitised, spun, political bullc**p that has become the norm.

 

I think we all know what a discussion is. But you can't have a discussion with someone who has already made up his mind and in this case no one will make him change his mind.

 

I also appreciate someone who speaks their mind, but you can't say firmly and that is your standing on one thing and then say your are going to discuss it. He has never once said he is open to persuasion, so what is the point of a discussion.

[Conniff]

Spy satellites will pick up any launch through heat signatures

The yanks have NORAD, the soviets similar anywhere on the planet, no doubt the chinese as well

They pick up any surface launch Instantaneously and reactive procedures put into place until identified

 

What corbyn is saying is not silly

 

It makes perfect sense

 

He will not push the button

 

HE WILL LEAVE THAT UP TO NATO

 

Now you really are talking nonsense. Even if they do get the launch platform, it matters not, he has got the missiles off.

[Conniff]

It's silly because it's like you said in another thread, an oxymoron.

[estellyn]

I think we all know what a discussion is. But you can't have a discussion with someone who has already made up his mind and in this case no one will make him change his mind.

 

I also appreciate someone who speaks their mind, but you can't say firmly and that is your standing on one thing and then say your are going to discuss it. He has never once said he is open to persuasion, so what is the point of a discussion.

 

If you believe that the only point of a discussion is to convince people partaking in the discussion that they are wrong, then you have a very narrow view. Political debates often take place between people of set opinions, and the purpose is to allow the public, the viewers to decide which of the presented opinions they believe. Corbyn's 'discussion' doesn't have to be about whether his opinion can or can't be changed.

[unclebulgaria67]

Corbyn is just one person, out of over 200 Labour MP's and over 400,000 Labour members. He can state his well known views again and still hold a discussion. As leader of the party, he will have to accept the democratic view of the party. At the Labour conference it was not debated, as several large unions were not happy about impact on jobs.

 

Is Corbyn silly or just that someone does not agree with him ?

[Conniff]

If you believe that the only point of a discussion is to convince people partaking in the discussion that they are wrong, then you have a very narrow view. Political debates often take place between people of set opinions, and the purpose is to allow the public, the viewers to decide which of the presented opinions they believe. Corbyn's 'discussion' doesn't have to be about whether his opinion can or can't be changed.

 

 

 

You're not getting it. Opinions matter not, Corbyn has said "he will not press the button under any circumstances" so what is there to discuss ???

Edited September 30, 2015 by Conniff

[Conniff]

Corbyn is just one person, out of over 200 Labour MP's and over 400,000 Labour members. He can state his well known views again and still hold a discussion. As leader of the party, he will have to accept the democratic view of the party. At the Labour conference it was not debated, as several large unions were not happy about impact on jobs.

 

Is Corbyn silly or just that someone does not agree with him ?

 

I don't believe he is silly, but what he has said is. If the whole country wants this deterrent system, it's still no good if he won't press the button. We will need someone who will abide with and carry out the will of the people.

[obiter dictum]

He has also stated he wants to scrap the deterrent

He has stated that for the last 50 years

Does not mean that will happen as that is not his decision to make

 

He is not a Demagogue

 

If the deterrent is to be scrapped, that will be through the decision of the electorate, not the executive

Edited September 30, 2015 by obiter dictum

[estellyn]

You're not getting it. Opinions matter not, Corbyn has said "he will not press the button under any circumstances" so what is there to discuss ???

 

Er, he states his opinion, others state theirs, public then decide who to support - what's difficult to understand about that?

[Conniff]

Er, he states his opinion, others state theirs, public then decide who to support - what's difficult to understand about that?

 

I am asking - What is there to discuss ??

[Conniff]

Not really.

 

Any new nuclear deterrent wont come into effect until 2026 All it means is that if Trident is renewed, he will not be the one to use it. There is a get out clause in that the process for nuclear launch mandate that he nominates a deputy whose name is kept in the sub vault who can authorise launch in his absence or being incapacitated.

 

His current deputy has made it clear that he supports trident. So therefore if the event arose where nuclear strike was required, JC could resign and pre authorisation falls to the deputy. The deterrent is not reduced and still effective while JC stands by his principles.

 

That isn't how a launch is initiated.

[obiter dictum]

To be honest no one knows how a launch is iniated as that will be subject to the Official Secrets Act

 

Considering the whole Trident system is american, that includes satellite telematary supplied by the yanks, if a British Prime Minister ever decided to lauch and press the red button, all that will happen is:

 

A light will blink on the american presidents bed side table, a sort of bat phone

[Conniff]

To be honest no one knows how a launch is iniated as that will be subject to the Official Secrets Act

 

Considering the whole Trident system is american, that includes satellite telematary supplied by the yanks, if a British Prime Minister ever decided to lauch and press the red button, all that will happen is:

 

A light will blink on the american presidents bed side table, a sort of bat phone

 

I say again, you really have no idea, you've been watching too many movies.

[obiter dictum]

Not really

 

20 years service in the millitary

 

All decisions have to go through NATO

 

That will be RAF Northwood