77% of Voters Didn't Want The Liberal Democrats

[WillPS]

No. We've already been taken over by Brussels (read: Berlin).

Funny, you live in The Erewash Valley and have that view. A certain leader of Veritas was trying to persuade your neighbours of exactly the same thing 5 years ago.

[Chie]

Which "other countries" pose the threat of invasion, out of interest?

All of them.

Are you living in the 1800s?

Scrapping nuclear weapons would take us back in time to the point before the first nuclear bomb was invented. It's foolish to think the world would get along in perfect harmony without them just because it's the 21st Century.

[Sput]

Do you speak any language apart from Hyperbollocks?

[Chie]

Why is it bollocks?

[Sput]

1. Only morons would actually believe we've been taken over by Europe (Read: daily mail morons, not that I am saying you read it, just that you have the same outlook).
2.No-one claimed the world would live in harmony if Britain got rid of Trident. You either wilfully or accidentally missed the point of what they're saying. They're saying that Trident does no good and costs a load of money.

[Chie]

1. Only morons would actually believe we've been taken over by Europe (Read: daily mail morons, not that I am saying you read it, just that you have the same outlook).

Well of course I don't actually believe we've literally been taken over by Europe. No-one does.

2.No-one claimed the world would live in harmony if Britain got rid of Trident. You either wilfully or accidentally missed the point of what they're saying. They're saying that Trident does no good and costs a load of money.

And I'm saying Trident is a good thing because it prevents conflict and scrapping nuclear weapons would take us back to the time when invasion and conflict were more commonplace.

People do seem to have this odd idea that, in a nuclear-free world, we could rely solely on the fact that our world is more enlightened and modern than it was in 1939, and this enlightenment alone would be enough to avert conflict.

However, people thought they were modern, enlightened, that they'd arrived and that humanity had finally reached the apex of civilization in 1910. So did people in 1810. And 1710. And 1610. Of course, we know they were wrong, so I've no idea why some now believe that invasion and conflict are suddenly going to stop just because it's 2010. The only thing maintaining some semblance of peace at the moment is nuclear weapons.

[Sput]

However, people thought they were modern, enlightened, that they'd arrived and that humanity had finally reached the apex of civilization in 1910. So did people in 1810. And 1710. And 1610. Of course, we know they were wrong, so I've no idea why some now believe that invasion and conflict are suddenly going to stop just because it's 2010. The only thing maintaining some semblance of peace DURING THE COLD WAR WAS nuclear weapons.

FIXED IT FOR YOU

Anyway: Are you or are you not suggesting that Britain is at greater risk of invasion from every single country if we get rid of Trident?

and if I'm not mistaken, you seem to believe that the apex of civilisation was some time after the establishment of nuclear weapons, at the height of the british empire, and before electricity and cities came into being.

[Chie]

FIXED IT FOR YOU

Anyway: Are you or are you not suggesting that Britain is at greater risk of invasion from every single country if we get rid of Trident?

Every country has the potential to become an invading force. Nobody predicted all the conflicts that happened in the past. We can't afford to become complacent by thinking those type of things will never occur again.

We're kind of resting on our laurels and doing what people have always done - believing that our world is more perfect than at any time in history and that nothing can go wrong, because we're far more sophisticated than what went before. But that's what people thought prior to the second world war too, and during the industrial revolution, and in the 18th century, and in Roman times, and in Ancient Egypt. They were naive.

Take recent decades as a more specific example. Observe how people look back at the 80s and cringe at their own naivety. You think we won't be doing the same in 30 years time? Of course we will. But where the security of our people, resources, economy are concerned, we just can't afford to be so laid back.

Imagine 50 years after global nuclear disarmament, when the modern world of 2060 is pissing all over what we're doing today because they're so much more sophisticated and modern than us, a country invents a weapon equally or more destructive than our most powerful nuclear weapons are today? What is the UK going to defend itself with then?

and if I'm not mistaken, you seem to believe that the apex of civilisation was some time after the establishment of nuclear weapons, at the height of the british empire, and before electricity and cities came into being.

I don't believe I've ever condoned or even spoken about the British Empire, Sput. Although as it happens, I don't think it was as bad as a lot of people like to make out either.

[Finn]

Observe how people look back at the 80s and cringe at their own naivety.

Huh?

You're nowhere near old enough to have a clue how those of us who lived through the 80s view it.

Naivety is certainly not a word I'd use to describe the 80s.

[Chie]

I'm talking more in terms of people in previous decades falsely believing the world had self-actualised and that the future was going to be great.

Has it been as great as you thought it would be? Did you expect all the bad things that have happened since then, to happen?

[Sput]

I don't believe I've ever condoned or even spoken about the British Empire, Sput. Although as it happens, I don't think it was as bad as a lot of people like to make out either.

Well quite. You can't make an omlette without slaughtering a few hundred thousand darkies!