We couldn't trust our politicians to tell us the truth over Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction which Sadaam Hussein did not possess. Instead they told us lies and acted upon flimsy interpretations of intelligence reports, resulting in an illegal war in Iraq. In the light of this incompetence, how on earth can they be trusted with a new an presumably deadlier nuclear capability ?
2007-03-13 23:37:33 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
It's all pretty smart saying we haven't had to use the weapons for 60 years etc., but I would point out that we have never had a position in that time where either the US or UK are so volatile as to enter into an Iraq type situation without UN approval. I feel that the western leaders are more irresponsible and less trustworthy than they have been at any point in time since the start of the Cold War.
2007-03-14 04:34:30 · update #1
How long have we had our own Nuclear deterrent ? Since mid 50s ? I think we can be trusted because we've never used it nor theatened to use it.
There are reasonable military reasons for having the trident nuclear missile "deterrent" on submarines (enemy doesn't know exactly where they are compared to land silos)..... but the ocean can be a cruel mistress. My fear is that a sub could find itself in difficulties.. or worse still a mini sea quake.. and sink.
2007-03-13 23:43:13 · answer #1 · answered by Narky 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Last time I checked the ONLY country threatening to "wipe Isreal off the map"(or ANY country) was Iran. We haven't recklessly threatened ANYONE with an suggested nuclear attack. And with the behavior of the terrorists who constantly reinforce just how depraived and barbaric they are, I'll trust them to NOT show any respect for or common decency toward ANYONE. So until you can turn your oh so critical eyes in ALL directions don't waste everyone's time with this one sided "question".
2007-03-14 06:47:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is because of our leaders that we need this deterrent. It is their actions that have made us a more likely target, We should have stopped Iraq happening: I demonstrated but could have done more.
Oh, and Iran have not threatened to wipe Israel off the map. Check what was said and in what context.
2007-03-14 07:06:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is important for the uk to keep a neuclear deterant with all the pscho's out there trying to get there hands on WMDs. We have never used our neuclear weapons in 60 years, so why would we now unless we were under attack?
2007-03-14 06:49:03 · answer #4 · answered by ? 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They haven't got a clue. Never had, never will have. Hurry up though before Care- not- Blair finds out or he will ring his mate in the US Busshy -Wacko and tell him to attack the north east of the Uk cos he thinks they have Weapons of Mass Destruction.
2007-03-14 07:02:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
OK lets put it in terms you may understand.
Should everyone have a gun.
Don't you think some people should have guns and others shouldn't.
If you don't believe that than I can understand and respect your post.
If you can't see the difference between the US and Iran I suggest you go there and say the same thing there.
2007-03-14 08:23:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
upgrade, but tell the yanks to keep thier hands off.do not worrie about Iran,Isreal can take them out if they need to.
2007-03-14 08:00:14 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
can we afford to not trust them Iran is getting pretty much above their station as is their PMs jacket
2007-03-14 07:07:06 · answer #8 · answered by neil m 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋