Jump to content

EU


Redrobbie99
 Share

Recommended Posts

Watching the horror and destruction that we see almost daily on TV, I would rather see £200 Billion spent protecting us.

 

No amount of money can compensate for the human suffering and destruction that is caused by war.

 

The fact we have Trident is hopefully a deterrent,and it is probably better to have our own defense rather than rely on other countries NATO or not.

 

Of course we do not want Trident but if it maintains peace then it is well worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching the horror and destruction that we see almost daily on TV, I would rather see £200 Billion spent protecting us.

 

No amount of money can compensate for the human suffering and destruction that is caused by war.

 

The fact we have Trident is hopefully a deterrent,and it is probably better to have our own defense rather than rely on other countries NATO or not.

 

Of course we do not want Trident but if it maintains peace then it is well worth it.

Are you saying Nato would not stand by the UK should we be attacked ? . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Watching the horror and destruction that we see almost daily on TV, I would rather see £200 Billion spent protecting us.

 

No amount of money can compensate for the human suffering and destruction that is caused by war.

 

The fact we have Trident is hopefully a deterrent,and it is probably better to have our own defense rather than rely on other countries NATO or not.

 

Of course we do not want Trident but if it maintains peace then it is well worth it.

Are you saying Nato would not stand by the UK should we be attacked ? . 

 

Always best to be able to stand up for ourselves,and rely on no one , but I would hope NATO would and certainly should assist us,after all we are a member are we not.

 

The fact we have Trident must surely offer some protection to our European friends also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Watching the horror and destruction that we see almost daily on TV, I would rather see £200 Billion spent protecting us.

 

No amount of money can compensate for the human suffering and destruction that is caused by war.

 

The fact we have Trident is hopefully a deterrent,and it is probably better to have our own defense rather than rely on other countries NATO or not.

 

Of course we do not want Trident but if it maintains peace then it is well worth it.

Are you saying Nato would not stand by the UK should we be attacked ? . 

 

Always best to be able to stand up for ourselves,and rely on no one , but I would hope NATO would and certainly should assist us,after all we are a member are we not.

 

The fact we have Trident must surely offer some protection to our European friends also.

 

you certainly cant trust them after the assurances given to the Ukraine that they would be protected if they gave up there nuclear deterent then when they do and Russia invades everybody whistles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Watching the horror and destruction that we see almost daily on TV, I would rather see £200 Billion spent protecting us.

 

No amount of money can compensate for the human suffering and destruction that is caused by war.

 

The fact we have Trident is hopefully a deterrent,and it is probably better to have our own defense rather than rely on other countries NATO or not.

 

Of course we do not want Trident but if it maintains peace then it is well worth it.

Are you saying Nato would not stand by the UK should we be attacked ? . 

 

Always best to be able to stand up for ourselves,and rely on no one , but I would hope NATO would and certainly should assist us,after all we are a member are we not.

 

The fact we have Trident must surely offer some protection to our European friends also.

 

 

It's perhaps no more than good luck that we have Trident. Europe appears friendly at present, there is no guarantee that will remain once we are out. Then we may be grateful to have a few Tridents hidden away at Faslane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that for all the talk of "Our Special Relationship" with the US, we've had our backs to the wall twice in the past hundred years or so, and on both occasions, they failed us until they were forced to join in.  It was only after the sinking by a U-Boat of the Lusitania off the coast of Ireland that America joined. Even then, with hundreds of US citizens onboard being drowned, Washington dragged its feet. It was only when the British Ambassador showed an intercepted message from Germany to Mexico promising assistance for an invasion of US territory, that Washington entered the First World War on the Allies side. Was a bit of a miscalculation by the Germans. They were so convinced America was going to declare war after the sinking that they felt they had to keep the US out of the European war by creating a war on its own border. The US then kept out of WW2 until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbo(u)r. As for the Falkland Islands.....The less said, the better. History has proven we can not rely on 'Uncle Sam'.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to whether we can be totally certain that NATO would automatically help defend us if we are attacked, you might like to ask our friends in the Baltic republics their views on the same question. They are also full NATO members and in the EU. They are also much closer to reality. The replies might not be 100% reassuring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have clarified what I meant. In which way a difficult political situation? I don't recall the U.S.A. as having a particular alligence to Argentina.

they were distressed by the threat of the sickle arriving on what they regarded as there continent and so stabbed us in the back weakening our position and emboldening the Argentinians prolonging the war and probably increasing the casualties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was difficult for the US as they did not want to see the collapse of the pro-US Galtieri regime as they believed (quite rightly) that a defeat for the Junta would result in the collapse of the regime and may leave the country open to influence from internal pro-communist politics. Also, by going against Argentina, this could prompt adverse reaction from other South American countries who the US were keen to keep away from USSR or Cuban influence.

 

The US was also a signatory for the Pan-American agreement (can't remember what it was called) which American continent countries signed up for to back each other up if in conflict in an armed external aggressor. But after a while the US stance was that seeing as Argentina was the initial aggressor, the US had no need to offer political or military support to Argentina.

 

The Yanks did do us a lot of big favours regarding Sidewinder kit, intelligence and access to the USAF base on Ascension. Plus Thatcher had assured the US that the UK could handle the situation without calling on direct intervention from the US military. This was seen as a 'good thing' as it would prove that the UK could act independently of the US....something the Soviet Union believed the UK was incapable of doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mr.Brown

^Well the USA don't seem to mind the risk of causing "adverse reactions" from South America or Middle America or any other country for that matter, at present. As I recall that phrase "special relationship" was well used at the time, represented by Margaret Thatcher's & Ronald Reagan's cringe worthy (sorry but can't think of a more diplomatic way to say it) behaviour with each other. When it came to the crunch it wasn't special enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...