Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
North Korea’s army is a million strong, but it’s so crap in terms of supplies that it’s likely to run out of shells within a couple of weeks in the event of a war.
I don’t think the Korean people are as indocrinated as the media seems to show, even those in the military. I think as soon as a war started you would see elements of the North Korean military break off and fight against the government if they see a chance at freedom.
Even the ones that truely believe, their image of Kim and his narative would be shattered after the first few defeats against American forces, which would destroy moral within their army.
All I will say is that unless you are EXTREMLY unlucky if your medical conditions are serious you get treated as urgent or in the case of Cancer seen by a consultant within 2 weeks! 😠
This isn’t something I am prepared to discuss in public.
If the news is wrong in any way, then let me know how, but my sources are very good, and I would want equally good sources before I agree. Until then, stop accusing me of using false news about arguments I’m not making.
Please provide me with some of your very good sources.
Politics has no place in science, if anything you said is actually true then ESA should be immediately defunded, and is likely doomed to failure.
Do you agree that the UK is forced to follow US foreign and often economic policy? The UK is going to be desperate for a US trade deal – that’s no big revelation of mine. The US is going to be putting America First – that is a quote from your hero, Donald Duck, who never said that Britain is first in the queue (Paul Ryan is starting to say that, mind you, perhaps aware of the awful situation Britain might be finding itself in March, 2019). The Americans don’t exist to do us favours.
No, the UK and US both make the same mistakes in foreign policy. Not because either was forced to but because of poor leadership on both parts. The ecconomic policies are fairly different however.
This is entirely false, I think you are confusing the European Space Program (ESP) with the European Space Agency (ESA). The ESA already has non-EU members, Norway, Finland and Switzerland. Removal of the UK from the program would be completely unjustified and would cripple the organisation as it would have to buy back the assets that we have shared ownership of.
Also Canada is a ‘cooperating member’ of ESA. Canada, the country in North America. Fairly certain that isn’t an EU member either.
I can find no information from anyone in ESA that suggests the UK would no longer be allowed membership, only speculation from external entities. So I think calling this fake news was accurate.
The UK will no longer be a member of the ESA once it leaves the EU – it will have to negotiate a new security relationship with the EU. The new rules mean that the UK will be frozen out of contracts even while remaining a EU member. Your ‘news’ that the UK is still a member of ESA is misleading. We’re still a member of the EU, but we leave in two years. At that point we leave the ESA unless we can renegotiate the security treaty.
This is entirely false, I think you are confusing the European Space Program (ESP) with the European Space Agency (ESA). The ESA already has non-EU members, Norway, Finland and Switzerland. Removal of the UK from the program would be completely unjustified and would cripple the organisation as it would have to buy back the assets that we have shared ownership of.
You really have no clue as to the way trading works. WTO rules mean no deal – the hardest of brexits. It means that the terms of trade are totally against us. The WTO has made clear that every trade treaty since 1973 whihc Britain has been a part of will be null and void. Trading by WTO rules alone would be catastrophic for our economy. UKIP mauy be blithely unaware of this, but Mother Theresa is very aware of this!
We are trading with the US under WTO rules now Scep. In regards to the EU, there will be a trade deal, they have tarrif free access for goods already with Canada and Turkey. There is no reason why we can’t have at least a good of a deal, we are a lot bigger ecconomy than either, and the trade is already in place.
Are you trying to be UKIP Defence Secretary in your discussion of nuclear war and Britain’s military power?
Was anything I said wrong?
Look at my argument more carefully about the role of Capita, a private organisation working for profit within the NHS and Britain’s education system. The NHS and education farm out services and insurance where once these were virtually all publicly owned. The Americans have their eyes on this.
I don’t care if the NHS is privatised, it’s next to usless for me. Nearly all of my healthcare is private because the NHS either won’t provide it all, or I have to wait months before I can even speak to someone. If the NHS was the only option then I would be dead several times over by now.
This is a genuine concern, whihc is made in serious newspaper comment, and you need to read something other than the Breitbart news and address the actual points, not the points I’m not making.
I don’t read Breitbart. They try to protect christianity too much. I want religion to disapear entirely. I don’t have time for their nonsense.
If Britain goes to war with Russia, the whole island would be turned into a nuclear waste-dump within minutes.
Assuming that:
A. Russia is stupid enough to use nuclear weapons against another nuclear power
B. The Russian nuclear weapons still work
C. Our missle defenses don’t work
It ain’t going to happen because the UK is not an independent armed power. We rely on the US, and we do what the US tells us to do.
Only the nuclear submarines are American designed, the new navy planes are a joint project. Everything else is british made. American tanks use British designed armour, does that mean that the US isn’t an independently armed power?
That’s what we do. Britain had no interest in going to war with Afghanistan or Iraq, but we went to war because that’s what we do – what America tells us.
We went to war because Blair is a liar and a war criminal.
We went into the EU because America told us to. Kennedy insisted on it. That’s why de Gaulle wouldn’t let us into the EU, because he said we would be an American Trojan Horse.
Then why are we leaving it when the president (Obama at the time) told us not to?
We remain a major economic power (not the 5th biggest power, but it’s big).
5th by GDP, we were 6th for a few weeks but are back to 5th again.
But in deciding to reduce our trade with the EU (we’re just being frozen out of the multi-billion euro Galileo space project in which we were the primary beneficiaries;
Galileo is an ESA project, which isn’t part of the EU. We will still be one of ESA’s 22 members. Fake news, Scep.
apparently Frankfurt, not Paris, is winning the money that London is voluntarily giving up in the valuable Euro markets), we’re desperate for trade deals. India for one smells blood in the water.
WTO tarrifs would be less than the membership fees we pay to the EU, we can afford to walk away from unfavorable deals.
We’re particularly desperate for a trade deal with the US, which means that Boris Johnson is going to have to take it where it hurts from Trump, whenever Trump feels like it. As he said to one female contestant on his reality show, “you’d look pretty good facing the wall on your knees”.
I would be very supprised if Boris is still a cabinet minister after the general election. But as I said, we are not desperate. We don’t currently have a trade deal with the US, so nothing will change if we don’t agree to their terms.
America isn’t going to be doing us, or anyone, any favours. They will trade with us to gain money, and that’s why American companies are beginning to slaver over the NHS.
Again, which companies? The NHS completely dwarfs any individual US healthcare provider. They couldn’t afford to buy even parts of it, parts that aren’t even for sale.
i remember when the NHS and education was publicly owned and controlled, dedicated to providing health care and education above any demands for profit.
The NHS is publicly owned, what are you talking about? So are nearlly all schools.
You live in cloud cuckoo land. You just make it up as you go along.
You haven’t refuted anything I have said.
Also, the British and American amred forces are the only ones to have any recent combat experience, in Iraq and Afganistan. The last was between developed countries was the Falklands war, which was decisively won by Britain.
As far as I can tell Britain is the only country that has been able to reliably win wars, we are doing a better job in Afganistan than the Soviet Union did, and better than the US did on it’s own in Vietnam as much as that can be compared to the Middle East.
The other day you made a thread about the Independent misquoting statistics (it wasn’t), you live in cloud cuckoo land if you think the UK is the worlds 2nd largest military power.
We’re the only country other than the US to have more than 1 aircraft carrier. Admitedly they are under construction still, but Russia doesn’t even have any dedicated air support for their navy. Military strategy isn’t my strong point but if we have 100 planes, and Russia has 0 then I think victory at sea is nearly guarenteed. Also the UK controls several key trading lanes, the gap between Scotland and the Artic, the English Channel, and entrance into the Mediterranean with Gibralter, all of which have large navy bases nearby.
Our nuclear submarines (trident) are also a lot more advanced than the ones Russia or China have, even though they are scheduled for replacement. But even without nuclear weapons, I don’t see how anyone other than the US would stand any chance of landing troops in Britain, and even then I don’t think it would be possible as they would be in range of the RAF at that point which would neutralise the advantage America has in naval air power.
Post-Brexit Britain gets ready to become a US dependency in its desperation for a trade deal to save her from a post-Brexit disaster
The UK is the 2nd largest military power, and the 5th largest ecconomy. We will be fine. Canada for example is far, far smaller than us, would you also describe that as a US dependency?
Boris might raise laughs over his calling Corbyn a mutton-headed Mugwump, but he’s saying he would bomb Syria without necessarily going to Parliament if Trump asks him to. He’ll support anything Trump does over North Korea, Iran, anything really.
Boris is the foreign secretary, he can’t bomb anyone with or without parliament. May however can, And I would oppose her escalating conflict in Syria. North Korea on the other had I would support, we should have declared war on them decades ago. China won’t risk war with NATO to defend a country which is almost as likely to nuke it as it is the US.
And with US companies ganging up to muscle in on the NHS, you can kiss goodbye to what’s already becoming a very frayed institution..
I’ve never really understood this argument, how exactly do you think that US companies are going to take over the NHS? Even if you viewed it as an independent company, not part of the government, it’s far larger than any company that offeres healthcare in the US. It’s the 5th largest employer in the world, and will soon overtake McDonalds to become 4th.
