Off Topic The QPR Not 606 Rolling Election Poll

Good to hear a bit of tree hugging mate.

 

Yep, never heard of any tree-hugging ideas getting people into needless wars

 

Nice utopian view, but it only needs one country to keep a warhead to topple the tree you're hugging. And one madman at the security council will do the same thing. As it is, there's a number of things that need to go completely mental before anyone would actually consider pushing the button. That's where the balance lies.

 

It is a very hypothetical view I admit.

Would you say that the number of warheads is just enough to maintain the balance (ie not overstocked) and would you say that Britain having four nuclear submarines is a key role in that balance and that number is the minimum we can have to play that role?

 

I'd say that we've grown as a species beyond the need to kill each other a hundred times over, as the various SALT treaties of the 80s and 90s demonstrated, and as the deconstruction of the Eastern Bloc showed.

I don't think it's a matter of numbers, until you get to the point where a single strategically placed pre-emptive strike destroys a nation's capacity to respond. In that sense, I think we probably have the right number now. Whether our ability to disperse and protect would be significantly reduced with three instead of four, I'm not sure. I also can't say for certain whether it is wise to have a single facility for maintenance and armament, as that simply creates the target.

All I do know for sure, is that I lived through the seventies, eighties and nineties, and the fear of WW3 that went along with all that, and that terrorism notwithstanding, I feel safer today than I ever have. So I'm for keeping the current status quo.

 

That's fair enough Chaz. I think it's just two views of the same situation.

My hypothetical view would require detection abilities that could cover huge areas and through underground facilities (although I didn't want to bog my post down with science fiction).

My real view is that the deterrent status quo is better held by those that have many magnitudes more warheads.

It's a bit of a passive stance but it seems to me like we have one foot in a race that has already been run and we're not on the podium (ie a negligible contribution).

 

Once again, Irony totally lost

 

Seriously Swords, are you going to offer an opinion or just deride others? I'm genuinely wanting to know.

 

How many Countries has the UK been at war with in the last Century compared to, say Iran, who's nuclear programme is causing you so many jitters during the night, Chaz?

 

Still not answering my question. Swords?

 

Right, on the policy quiz posted earlier, I came out 40% Tory, 30% Labour and 30% Liberal. Just done Ubers quiz again, and came out the same as when he posted it the first time, ages ago, a libertarian leftie


...which is the Ghandi/Green option. I'm a bit confused. And this completely useless campaign by all parties isn't helping.

 

Today's party political by the Greens was as bonkers as their leader, they truly area bunch of basket-cases, albeit well-meaning...

 

Well, has anyone thought that the next coalition may be with Ed miliband as PM and Nicola Sturgeon as deputy prime minister? This really could happen. What does everyone think of that?

 

Don't say that Sooper, that sounds like my kind of political party

 

Monster Raving Loonies Lite...

 

Alex Salmond, deputy prime minister: how it could happen

Alex Salmond, the outgoing SNP leader and First Minister of Scotland, is poised to make an audacious comeback at Westminster as the leader of a bloc of Scottish Nationalist MPs who could wield serious power in a hung Parliament.


Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/6...me-minister-how-it-could-happen#ixzz3WqP7imep

 

Not too far off the mark. I love a bit of chaos and it looks like this election will provide it in abundance.

Even more fun if like me you are an ex Labour Tory boy who went full circle and now can't be arsed to vote anymore . We are doomed I tell you, doomed

 

So you were a bit of a 'party tart' then UTR's?...

 

I feel similarly dispirited by the campaign so far, Stan - so much negativity, epitomised by Fallon this morning. I'm desperately looking for good constructive reasons to vote Labour (i.e. more than just the desire to kick the posh boys out), but they don't seem capable of coming up with anything. Setting aside the independence issue, the SNP probably come closest to the kind of agenda I would favour, but of course I can't vote for them. My favoured realistic outcome is a Labour minority government pushed leftwards by the SNP and a touch of Green.

I had a very interesting conversation last night with a woman who was working in Tory central office when Thatcher came to power. She had no time for Thatcher and went on to work for the Tory Reform Group (Maggie's 'Wets') and considers herself nowadays to the left of the Labour party on many issues.

 

If you'll allow me to stoop to the lowest form of wit for a second: that sounds heavenly.