Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Before Trident there was Polaris.

However the point still stands that it would be politically inconceivable to attack Argentina with nuclear weapons over the Falklands dispute.

AustonT wrote:

Joey wrote:The Royal Navy still has Trident, 200 nuclear war heads mounted on submarines capable of being anywhere in the world.
As others have said, Britain would never nuke Argentina over the Falklands but it's worth remembering.

What relevance exactly did this bring to the table? That a missile system not in service in the RN until 1994 would have somehow impacted the war that ended 12 years before? Or that the conservative party that just vibrates you out of your skin on the original issue of this thread both procured them and saved them from the axe?

Perhaps AustonT it may be that Joey is worried that Cameron is playing with the space time continuum. He would have a fairly strong case for 'incompetence' if it proves to be true.

Orlanth wrote:

AustonT wrote:

Joey wrote:The Royal Navy still has Trident, 200 nuclear war heads mounted on submarines capable of being anywhere in the world.
As others have said, Britain would never nuke Argentina over the Falklands but it's worth remembering.

What relevance exactly did this bring to the table? That a missile system not in service in the RN until 1994 would have somehow impacted the war that ended 12 years before? Or that the conservative party that just vibrates you out of your skin on the original issue of this thread both procured them and saved them from the axe?

Perhaps AustonT it may be that Joey is worried that Cameron is playing with the space time continuum. He would have a fairly strong case for 'incompetence' if it proves to be true.

Here here. Because if the Tories can control space time and he hasn't gone back and fixed the British train system, of for no better reason than to be faster, more efficient, and as cheap as France's. Then he truly IS incompetent. Perhaps while he's back in the...let's say 70's he can tidy up some other items. Increased independence from the US in the manufacture of weapons, bomb Iran then, put money into apple (wait 80's?), tell the Queen she is never going to die...you know important things.

It is all an impossible dream until the Large Hadron Collider is spun up to 100%

Orlanth wrote:

AustonT wrote:

Joey wrote:The Royal Navy still has Trident, 200 nuclear war heads mounted on submarines capable of being anywhere in the world.
As others have said, Britain would never nuke Argentina over the Falklands but it's worth remembering.

What relevance exactly did this bring to the table? That a missile system not in service in the RN until 1994 would have somehow impacted the war that ended 12 years before? Or that the conservative party that just vibrates you out of your skin on the original issue of this thread both procured them and saved them from the axe?

Perhaps AustonT it may be that Joey is worried that Cameron is playing with the space time continuum. He would have a fairly strong case for 'incompetence' if it proves to be true.

I'm confused.
You actually think Cameron is a competent Prime Minister?

Joey wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

AustonT wrote:

Joey wrote:The Royal Navy still has Trident, 200 nuclear war heads mounted on submarines capable of being anywhere in the world.
As others have said, Britain would never nuke Argentina over the Falklands but it's worth remembering.

What relevance exactly did this bring to the table? That a missile system not in service in the RN until 1994 would have somehow impacted the war that ended 12 years before? Or that the conservative party that just vibrates you out of your skin on the original issue of this thread both procured them and saved them from the axe?

Perhaps AustonT it may be that Joey is worried that Cameron is playing with the space time continuum. He would have a fairly strong case for 'incompetence' if it proves to be true.

I'm confused.
You actually think Cameron is a competent Prime Minister?

Relatively speaking. As someone who hates all parties equally, I think he's doing a decent job of it so far. He's not the next Disraeli but he's a fairly astute politician. Better certainly by a long shot than Clegg or Milliband.

There are turds floating in the Thames that would make better prime ministers than Ed Milliband and Nick Clegg.
I'm waiting for the labour party to wake up and vote Ken Livingston for party leader.

Now you must be trolling...

Ken Livingstone? As PM? Really? Words fail me....

Comparing Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson, neither of them have managed to do a bang-up job of running London, and both of them have the principle attraction of not being the other one.

filbert wrote:Now you must be trolling...

Ken Livingstone? As PM? Really? Words fail me....

Seriously mate, just don't bother.

Literally everything Joey says is absolutely ludicrous, he is in a tiny minority, and if he asserts something as fact there isn't any evidence for it. It's pretty much all just mindless and usually factually incorrect drivel.

Needless to say, I doubt the vast majority of people agree with him, and fortunately, he isn't the supreme dictator of the UK, no matter how much he wishes that were so.

On what possible grounds then, is David Cameron, love him or hate him.. an absolute fool?

I would go even further, what about Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband? Why are they liekned to "turds"? I mean, I dont think much of Miliband (prefered his brother) but none of the three strike me or pretty much anyone, as utterly witless fools.

Are you just angry at everyone? What is the point of all these sentences you keep typing?

Joey wrote:There are turds floating in the Thames that would make better prime ministers than Ed Milliband and Nick Clegg.
I'm waiting for the labour party to wake up and vote Ken Livingston for party leader.

That would be the same Ken Livingstone who took money from Iran to present a show on their English-language state TV channel, correct? And you're saying that he should be PM?


Wow.

mattyrm wrote:
I would go even further, what about Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband? Why are they liekned to "turds"? I mean, I dont think much of Miliband (prefered his brother) but none of the three strike me or pretty much anyone, as utterly witless fools.

Considering Clegg got picked up by Cameron for use as a bullet shield, and Ed got manipulated into taking charge of the party that's basically guaranteed to lose the next election, I must say, both have been completely outplayed by Cameron on the political field. He's far, far cannier than most people realise at spin, much moreso than New Labours hamfisted attempts during the last government.

No, he's a perfectly capable, astute politician, and one I have a certain amount of respect for. I may not like a number of his policies but he's far and away the best leader in the political class at the moment, and the inability of the opposition doesn't really detract from the political skill he's displayed thus far.

He's competent, and we could be in a worse position. I'll probably vote for him again next election, and then as the party becomes comfortable in power and publicly corrupt, vote him out at the election following that.

I agree Ketara, but then I think DC has done a good job so far, he seems to attack topics that I feel strongly about, and he has secured my vote next election. I was merely pointing out that even though I don't fancy voting for either Miliband or Clegg, I don't see them as being stupid, or claim that they are worse at politics than a turd.

Ive seen nobody who knows anything about politics, even the most left leaning columnist call Cameron " utterly incompetent" like our pal Joey here.

Seriously though, Dave Miliband is a far better party leader than chinless Ed though.

And he's got a speech impediment, its harder to take a bloke who speaks for a living seriously when he talks like Elmer Fudd.

Joey wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

AustonT wrote:

Joey wrote:The Royal Navy still has Trident, 200 nuclear war heads mounted on submarines capable of being anywhere in the world.
As others have said, Britain would never nuke Argentina over the Falklands but it's worth remembering.

What relevance exactly did this bring to the table? That a missile system not in service in the RN until 1994 would have somehow impacted the war that ended 12 years before? Or that the conservative party that just vibrates you out of your skin on the original issue of this thread both procured them and saved them from the axe?

Perhaps AustonT it may be that Joey is worried that Cameron is playing with the space time continuum. He would have a fairly strong case for 'incompetence' if it proves to be true.

I'm confused.
You actually think Cameron is a competent Prime Minister?

Joey wrote:There are turds floating in the Thames that would make better prime ministers than Ed Milliband and Nick Clegg.
I'm waiting for the labour party to wake up and vote Ken Livingston for party leader.

Oh you're confused but it has nothing to do with me. But do press on, this is fantastically entertaining. God Bless your heart you make Melissa look like a pants on head, rabid ultra conservative.

Okay I had no idea the forum would gak itself over a throwaway remark about Ken Livingstone, or that disagreeing with the Prime Minister makes me a rabid leftist.
This OT forum is clearly a waste of time. Shall we discuss Britain's place in Europe? No let's just insist that because right-wing newspaper editors say something, it must be true, and not bother debating, or thinking, or illuminating ourselves.
I suppose everyone here learned everything they needed to know decades ago, it certainly seems that way.
Guess I'll go read the Sun. I've been wasting my time with all this textbook nonsense.

Joey wrote:Okay I had no idea the forum would gak itself over a throwaway remark about Ken Livingstone, or that disagreeing with the Prime Minister makes me a rabid leftist.
This OT forum is clearly a waste of time.

...

Now truly you have achieved "satori".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
If people do want to continue the discussion, please remember that the regular DakkaDakka rules apply in the OT Forum.

You used a word that I had to look up.
Thankyou.

This has nothing to do with right wing rags droning on about a right wing PM. We're talking about a United Kingdom free from continental entanglements that endanger her identity and sovereignty, whilst the same multinational goat feth ON the continent is in so much trouble that it is literally BEGGING to be saved. Rats abandon a sinking ship, they don't swim from shore to scuttle.

Right so Cameron vetod a treaty that would enforce rules about government spending on the member countries so as to prevent further government debt default fears.
It had nothing whatsoever to do with the city of London, or a financial transaction tax. Cameron's decision to veto it was an entirely political one and, surprise surprise, the Tories have surged ahead about 5 points in the polls.
Something endorsed by right-wing tories, newspaper editors, AND the British public, can't possibly be a good idea.

Going by what you have hitherto written in this thread, you haven't posted anything that remotely qualifies as 'textbook nonsense' beyond vapid, inflammatory, ill-informed opinion. You can hardly complain when you get called on it.

filbert wrote:Going by what you have hitherto written in this thread, you haven't posted anything that remotely qualifies as 'textbook nonsense' beyond vapid, inflammatory, ill-informed opinion. You can hardly complain when you get called on it.

Seconded, as a person who is actually vaguely political astute himself.

right nevermind

Even Angela Bloody Merkel acknowledges that Britian opting out doesn't send her sprialing next to Iceland.

Merkel said that, while she regrets the decision, "it is beyond doubt for me that Great Britain will in future continue to be an important partner in the European Union".
"[Britain] is a reliable partner for Europe not just in questions of foreign and security policy … [it] is also this partner in many other questions – in competitiveness, in the internal market, for trade, for climate protection," she said.

I have to admit, I had a bit of a chuckle at the reports that Germany was printing off some spare Deutsch-marks 'just in case'...

HANS vee haf seen dis before. SCHTART ZEE PRINTERZ! Vee vil not go down vis zee Franks!

AustonT wrote:Even Angela Bloody Merkel acknowledges that Britian opting out doesn't send her sprialing next to Iceland.

Merkel said that, while she regrets the decision, "it is beyond doubt for me that Great Britain will in future continue to be an important partner in the European Union".
"[Britain] is a reliable partner for Europe not just in questions of foreign and security policy … [it] is also this partner in many other questions – in competitiveness, in the internal market, for trade, for climate protection," she said.

Hmm...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16164899
'German newspapers have been full of the triumph of Chancellor Angela Merkel and the demise of Britain. Television channels are running strap-lines reading "Britain against Europe"....The word "isoliert" (isolated) crops up everywhere. Tuesday's Tagespiegel has the British prime minister on the front page with the caption: "And now Mr Cameron? Great Britain has isolated itself with its veto on the treaty changes."...Peter Altmaier, one of Chancellor Merkel's inner circle and chief whip of her CDU party in the Bundestag, told the BBC: "We are looking forward very much to seeing Britain leading in Europe instead of staying isolated."..."The rest, led by Great Britain, are condemned to third-class status[in the EU]."'
Though of course the last line is telling "If the deal fails to convince the markets, it may be Chancellor Merkel who ends up in the rowing boat rather than David Cameron.".
Sarkozy already hated Cameron for his gimpishness "But in October he snapped at him during euro crisis talks in Brussels, suggesting he “shut up” and stop interfering." (http://www.iol.co.za/mercury/eu-finally-loses-patience-with-britain-1.1197119)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

filbert wrote:I have to admit, I had a bit of a chuckle at the reports that Germany was printing off some spare Deutsch-marks 'just in case'...

In case a Greek/Italian default causes the Euro to rise? The Euro at the moment is low, which is a massive boost to German exports.
So please explain to me how a debt crisis will make the currency increase/decrease in value to the extent that Germany has to re-issue the Deutschmark.

Joey wrote:[

filbert wrote:I have to admit, I had a bit of a chuckle at the reports that Germany was printing off some spare Deutsch-marks 'just in case'...

In case a Greek/Italian default causes the Euro to rise? The Euro at the moment is low, which is a massive boost to German exports.
So please explain to me how a debt crisis will make the currency increase/decrease in value to the extent that Germany has to re-issue the Deutschmark.

The Germans aren't worried that the Euro will rise - they are worried that the Italian/Spanish/Portugese/Greek debts will cause the Euro to fold completely.

Your link = So two days ago. From a secondary source
My link= Yesterday. From the camels mouth as it were
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16177674

Let's try today's Scotsman.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/uk/david_cameron_s_eu_veto_bolstered_at_home_and_even_in_europe_1_2008782

He was further bolstered by one of his principal European opponents, German chancellor Angela Merkel, who dismissed suggestions that Britain was on the fringes and insisted that it had an important future in the European Union.

And it's not like Cameron or the UK are alone in thier skepticism.

It was revealed yesterday that the Czech government was sceptical about the plans and the Irish government restated its intention to put any changes to a referendum. In the Netherlands, the Dutch government was under siege from opposition parties over its support for changes and there were also doubts in Hungary.

the Dutch are so tall they can see the Future!

And a blatant eurosceptic piece because it's true.

We are paying too much (our net EU contribution is rising from some £3.5 billion in 2008-9 to £12 billion in 2014-15), and the vast body of EU regulation stifles business and the City of London. Rising powers like Brazil, India and China don't have these burdens. To recover, we have to make the UK competitive. We cannot do that without leaving the EU.

We would flourish outside the EU.

Britain against Europe you say?

I feel sorry for them.

After me, Who do you think you are kiding Mrs Merkel........

Joey wrote:

filbert wrote:I have to admit, I had a bit of a chuckle at the reports that Germany was printing off some spare Deutsch-marks 'just in case'...

In case a Greek/Italian default causes the Euro to rise? The Euro at the moment is low, which is a massive boost to German exports.
So please explain to me how a debt crisis will make the currency increase/decrease in value to the extent that Germany has to re-issue the Deutschmark.

The fact the Germans are printing their old currency is a demonstration of how much confidence people have in the currency right now. The Euro is on its way out - in effect it's a project that's not worked and as a consequence is failing. The fact that Ireland has needed a bailout, Greece 2 bailouts and a new PM, and Spain & Italy having trouble paying back their our debts, not to mention all the other collective debts countries in Europe have associated with the Euro, there's just no way it'll work.

The sooner countries using the Euro begin reinstating their previous currencies, the faster the Euro can be put to bed and left alone until another person decides to try something similar again. There's potential for a single currency certainly but now is not the time.