I don't defend option 2 as the best, but let's all admit it's functionally identical to option 1. No one who was worried about getting hit by British nuclear weapons would now discount their use totally given Corbyn's statement if he became PM, and the way nuclear deterrence is supposed to work is that if there's even the slightest chance then it still holds.

/

Neither do I - please show me evidence to the contrary.

I left the labour party in 2003 and only rejoined before the 2015 leadership election.

False.

PartyGirl hope you were satisfied with my response to your questions - care to take the challenge yourself?

Just a hunch based on this strawman amongst other things

"So you believe we should never enter dialogue to end hostilities or that we should just do it at a faster pace if no one is being killed?"

And the fact that you asked the question of me in the first place - it felt as if you thought you were going to uncover some great logical fallacy in my reasoning.

Well I'd describe myself as a Lib Dem but I'd snap vote for the Tories over Labour in a two-way marginal so what do you want?

Confidence and Supply deal

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40403434

This is b.s & she should have governed without a deal. Giving pork barrel to a specific region is bull****. At the same time Scotland & in particular Wales are way overrepresented in Westminster so they can't really complain. Scottish MPs also gets to vote on devolved bills which is outrageous yet I expect we'll see the SNP complain. May bribing the DUP £1bn based on the threat of the DUP passing a vote of no confidence and electing an IRA sympathiser as prime minister doesn't augur well for her negotiating abilities re. Brexit.

??
What you quoted was me sarcastically replying to another poster who wasn't making sense. No strawman there.
And I simply asked you a question that was asked of me.
There's really no need for me to try to trip you up as you're doing a great job all by yourself.

Of course I am.

Deal done and first thing on the agenda was full implementation of the military covenant in NI.

Great deal for all she said. ****ing joke that some **** (and their kids) who volunteers to take part in war get any advantages over me and my kids. ****ing volunteers not conscripts.

I agree that's a mistake he made, and it's a rare instance of when a politician should lie.

Talk of a special position being created for Arlene to get her our of the way and get stormont up and running again.

Special brexit negotiator between Belfast/London/Dublin/Brussels. She knows there will be no chance of a deal with her as 1st minister.

May be the only good thing to come out of any deal is getting rid, poisonous ****.

If the Barnett formula is applied and a similar level of extra funding goes to the other home nations this DUP deal will end up costing £6 Billion.
This will end up in the courts if Wales and Scotland don't get a "bung"

McDonnell is the new Livingstone (but not in a good sense).

Source?

It's about adopting a progressive mindset and approaching other states about multi lateral disarmament. This position is much stronger coming from someone who is against the use of these weapons. It's all well and good complaining about other states not aligned with nato about their programmes but they will never give them up while the US etc have them.
Disarmament would, for example free up highly skilled labour for socially useful jobs and make the world safer.

The other argument comes from sections within the establishment which basically says the world has changed, the war on terror as opposed to the cold war, counter terrorism resources prioritised etc..

To answer the question, 2) is the best situation because it is a position that best allows for eventual decommissioning. The debate is heavily loaded with, i was going to say nationalism but it is really petty chauvinism/jingoism.

He didn't have to lie. He could have reasonably refused to answer the question. It is a ****ing stupid question.

But there is merit in him being quite open about it so maybe he was right to answer.

The last few weeks has taught us the value in not chasing after the support of the mainstream press.
We don't know if the number of votes gained by sticking to this principle was higher or lower than the votes lost. Certainly there is more inspiration.

Simple arithmetic.
I might be out by a few hundred million either way.
They can get it from the magic money tree.

Because they are both correct and unpopular with the right wing press?

3 would be actual decommissioning, how is that better than eventual decommissioning?

I see your point in general though.

I think you need to read up more about the Barnett formula. So should most of the press and certain politicians to be fair.

I cannot bring myself to believe anything labour says about immigration. Their constant namecalling of racist to anyone raising the issue in any way during 2005-2010 was disgusting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-40406346

No Barnett formula money for Scotland.