Jeremy Corbyn Elected

Fully automatic-let's hope not. In my experience such things malfunction easily and regularly. Mind you the other alternative, some gung-ho politician having to push the button is almost as bad. I do not understand how anyone professing to be a Christian can even consider supporting the use of nuclear weapons. The subsequent slaughter of innocent people would be horrendous. I am not religious but I don't believe that the use of nuclear weapons is ever acceptable. Trident should be scrapped.

Fully automatic? What could possibly go wrong? .

Fully automatic? I doubt it.

But are they really automatic? Surely there is human judgment involved at some point of the process?

The USSR had (still has?) a a semi-automatic dead-hand system, but the decision to launch a UK missile is in the hands of the Prime Minister, or, if he is killed and there is no replacement, there are sealed instructions in the safe of a submarine patrolling far out at sea. One of the first things a new Prime Minister has to do is to decide on the contents of those sealed instructions and send the latest version.

Finger on the nuclear button

Self defence is OK but most systems are automatic and if attacked these systems will send weapons back immediately.

GcD does Judo and has won medals. She was told that if she threw an attacker down, then she must run for her life as she is never in as much danger as when the attacked person gets up.
That must surely be the case if the UK used Trident.

Thanks for the link durhamjen.

What would be the point of people who wish to protest against the bedroom tax, cuts in tax credits, zero hours contracts, steep rise in food banks, increase increase in homeless , loss of local libraries and swimming pools, cut backs in mental health spending , the injustice of the widening gap between rich and poor. What would be the point of demonstrating at the labour/lib den/greens conferences ?

Soo tobe says I won't get bombed if I go shopping. Manchester was bombed in 1996, I wasn't in the city that day but various members ofmy family and friends were. There were many years when going shopping or to the theatre in Manchester went hand in hand with buildings being evacuated because of bomb scares. Our court buildings have been on high alert for some time as the risk of terrorist attack is considered likely. Bags and brief cases carefully searched before anyone is allowed into the buildings.

The UK may not have been attacked by another country since 1945 but I can think of over 20 occasions when it has been involved in military operations in countries as widespread as Greece, Malaya (as it was called during the "Emergency" in 1948), Korea, Egypt, Kenya, Cyprus, Oman, Jordan, Uganda, Aden, the Falklands, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Macedonia, Libya. No doubt there are other wars that I haven't recalled. Just as "peacekeeping" in Northern Ireland led to "asymmetrical warfare" on the mainland, so has almost constant intervention in the Middle East. It seems increasingly likely that continued interference intervention will lead to further asymmetrical "reprisals" in the UK.

On another note with regard to Trident, I recall a chilling interview with a five-star US general broadcast on BBC TV during the Cold War when he discussed a likely European war with what can only be described as glee. It quickly became apparent that a) the Pentagon was very keen to try out its new killing toys in a real war and b) it was highly dismissive of collateral damage - which would, of course, have included you and me. I am not so sure that we can be so blasé about no one really being willing to use nuclear weapons.

TBH I thought there are protesters at every Tory Party Conference, particularly if they are in power. It sounds like the numbers will be greater this year though. I certainly don't consider these protesters as a 'rent a mob'. Many will be protesting about issues like the changes to disability benefits. I don't have a problem with protesters at all. Anything is worth a try to get a message across.

nhaspace.com/2015/09/18/lets-all-bash-corbyn/

Durhamjen

Your post addressed to me 17.52

I am not looking for 'arguement' . If someone doesn't agree with you why do you so often consider it to be a cause for arguement.?

I simply hold a view which is in opposition to yours. You are prepared to accept the UK economy is worse than that of Zimbabwe and put up a link which you feel justifies your view.

I think it is ridiculous to consider the UK economy is below that of Zimbabwe and I am happy to stick with my opinion.

What disruption?

Re the protests at the Conservative Party Conference I will repeat my post 1 Oct 01.17

It will be seen by some as a demonstration of 'people power'

To others it will endorse their concerns that this is how the 'left of politics' cannot accept democracy/debate/discussion unless it is on their terms. More of it to come.

Some will find it funny, amusing empowering.

Some will find it intimidating, bullying.

I am pleased the Labour Party Conference wasn't subjected to intimidation/protest but I couldn't imagine for one moment why it would be.

We are supposed to live in a democratic country are we not? and attending a political conference is simply a democratic process. Well to most peoply anyway.

I will add that we will only know if there is a 'rent a mob' mentality by seeing how the protesters behave during the conference period. If I see , hear abusive behaviour I will happily call it a 'rent a mob' mentality.

It is not how one individual feels they behave but how the overall group behave that determines how a protest is viewed.

Yes we have a right to protest in the UK. The fact is had the boot been on the other foot and the Labour Party Conference had had to endure protests there would have been an outcry by those both inside and outside of the Conference, quite rightly so.

We may have a 'right to protest' but we don't have a 'right to cause disruption' just because we don't like/agree with another's views and that is exactly what I expect to see happening over the coming days/years.

Yes, well said Wilma

Well said, Wilma.

This is how I see it. If nuclear weapons are ever used the world will be a changed place. The impact of a nuclear attack will be felt over an enormous area and will never be restricted to a single country. The weather will ensure this. So what is the point of having nuclear weapons unless we are prepared to be the first to use them?

Trident should be scrapped for these reasons. The other reason is the cost which I find an obscene amount of money (plus at the end of the day it's likely to be more than one billion pounds because nothing comes in on budget).

My perception is the government wants to remain a nuclear power to give the impression it is still a world power, that is almost a cosmetic requirement to enable the public to think we're a world player. We're not.

I don't object to some of the Trident money being spent on other defence related costs like modern weapons, aircraft and ships. Things which will help defend the UK if we are attacked.

So you think it's okay, niggly for a prime minister to go completely against what the majority of parliament has decided, just because you deem them monsters? Anybody who is in Syria fighting for IS will either be bombed by Assad or any other group over there, Russians as well now. There was no need for Cameron to flout the will of parliament, but he does it all the time.
The reason for fighting in Syria is to keep the ideal of democracy going. Cameron does not accept democracy. Why should Assad? Actually I believe he was democratically elected, just the same as Cameron.
Cameron is acting just like him, just not killing quite so many people, and not in our own country. He'll go along with the UN providing it does what he wants; otherwise he'll ignore it.

I await condemnation for this view.

What Elegran and Ana said.

But actually, when a small minority of posters here or elsewhere are not able to see that we dont get bombed or attacked when we go shopping, and live in relative peace, then talking about anything else with them seems pointless.

To those that refer to people who demonstrate as "rent a mob", I have been on several demonstrations and I object to being referred to in such a way. I am a good deal more courteous and respectful than some of the people that post on here.

One of the cornerstones of a democracy is the right to protest - otherwise we would all be living in Pinochet's Chile or Stalin's Russia.

As I've said previously (on this or another thread), why would they be? No nuclear-equipped country is going to blast another off the face of the earth just because they can.

The repercussions would be enormous and they'd risk a counter-attack by friends and allies of the defenceless country they'd destroyed.

How many countries have been attacked with nuclear weapons? (not counting Hiroshima and Nagasaki)

When two countries have been at war, how many nuclear attacks have been threatened by one party if the other doesn't yield (not counting Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when the power of a nuclear bomb was unknown to Japan before it was dropped)?

So the eight countries with nuclear warfare do not attack us because we have Nuclear warfare . I would so like those who claim this to explain why 186 countries without this evil has not been attacked

You just don't get it, do you? Nuclear weapons are not a defence or deterrent against other forms of attack, just the nuclear option.

Funny that - rentamob will turn out for one party but not another. As mercenaries their thinking is are not financially practical.