Seil Chat

.

Do you know how to disarm any Russian or North Korean bombs quite so simply?

.

North Korea doesn't have a delivery system, and Russia is our pal. Must be, Cameron asked Putin to help him defeat Salmond in the referendum.

The Americans even think the UK renewing Trident is pointless.

It's Cameron's penis extension. Discredited, utterly unsuitable as a response to any conceivable threat we could face in the future - and morally indefensible.

You might want to download and read this. http://www.chathamhouse.org/publication ... iew/199200

Wouldn't suggest it as night time reading, though.

Now we are getting to the absurd.
Scotland voting for independence will not make the world a safer place.
If Faslane were to be dismantled it would only mean that it would not be a target for a nuclear strike and therefore the surrounding Scottish area would not suffer first hand destruction and radiation.
And Scotland renouncing a nuclear base is not going to make the world suddenly decide that nuclear power is bad and renounce the use of the lot - there are now enough nuclear powers out there to make the whole thing beyond control by any agency, and policing it (if it were feasible) would be impossible.
MAD (Mutually assured destruction) is the best defence we have against superpowers and rogue states, and terrorists, using these weapons, and has served us well since 1945.
One might as well trying to dis- invent the gun, the knife, or even the bow and arrow to make the world a safer place.

jimcee wrote:If Faslane were to be dismantled it would only mean that it would not be a target for a nuclear strike and therefore the surrounding Scottish area would not suffer first hand destruction and radiation.

Well, that's a good start, don't you think?

In fact, removing Trident is very likely to cause the UK to unilaterally disarm as there is nowhere else sensible to put this weapons system.

We will be doing the rest of the UK a huge favour when we vote YES on September 18th.

Israel is a concern, but I think we have seen they generally only go on the offensive when it is the best form of defence and only when severely provoked. And in their situation they prove the case for, and validity of, having nuclear weapons as the ultimate defence.

Russia is different. And much more dangerous. It's patently obvious that the SNP and Yes Campaign severely underestimate.....no, completely misunderstand the threat. An independent Scotland will severely weaken NATO, and Scotland, outside will be defensively weak.

Cameron wasn't trying to get Putin to back the No Campaign. Well, OK perhaps he was ....but there was a second bit the Yes Campaign controlled media did not mention for the fear it would put in voters minds. Part 2 was Cameron asked Putin to invade Scotland if there was a Yes vote!!!

Liar! Liar! No, I really did make that bit up. But seriously an independent Scotland, without the protection of Nato's nuclear weapons, and having weakened Nato significantly, by forcing Faslane to close, would be defenceless against an enemy like Russia.

Innes Newton wrote:But seriously an independent Scotland . . . would be defenceless against an enemy like Russia.

Yes, if Russia was our enemy and if we weren't members of NATO.

Neither of which is likely to apply.

Nick you deleted my post deliberately. Yet again you shy away from the truth. Shameful. You can't face it