(July 19, 2016 at 6:07 am)Mathilda Wrote:(July 19, 2016 at 6:00 am)SofaKingHigh Wrote: Could you please let me know where you got £205bn from??
As pointed out in parliament by the SNP last night, the government aren't actually revealing how much it will cost.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016...or-against
Quote:The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament puts the overall cost over the 30 years at £205bn. Reuters, in an analysis last year that was disputed by the MoD, put the cost at £167bn.
(July 19, 2016 at 6:00 am)SofaKingHigh Wrote: Useless? The naivety there really is quite astounding. I'd suggest the need is greater now than it ever was in the time of the cold war.
Explain how. What scenario is there where we would have to threaten to use nukes? And in that same scenario, why would the money be better spent on nukes and not the rest of the under equipped military?
You say that there is a greater need now than in the time of the cold war, but nukes are no use against terrorists.
Who said anything about terrorists? You seen what's been happening in Russia, or the South China sea lately?? The need for a nuclear deterrent is higher now than, I would say, at any other time.
Right, so I'll believe the SNP, who has absolutely no vested interest in exaggerating that figure.
Not at all.
You may refer to me as "Oh High One."
