tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post4489652082994247561..comments2023-10-01T16:53:17.274+01:00Comments on Cicero's Songs: Carrier WaveCicerohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02090838836212624633noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-2797458889046453322009-07-03T10:32:44.394+01:002009-07-03T10:32:44.394+01:00Dear Friends!
From may 2009, (insted the old – “ni...Dear Friends!<br />From may 2009, (insted the old – “nikotev.wordpress.com”)I have a new blog for modern and contemporary world history - “Nikolaykotev's Blog” with URL: http://nikolaykotev.wordpress.com/ . If you want, you can see it on this adress!<br />Best wishes<br />Nikolay Kotev<br />NEWS: approximately 1600 pictures and photos from the Second World WarAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-31489088072000845722009-06-23T11:32:02.211+01:002009-06-23T11:32:02.211+01:00I think the point is that even if we didn't ha...I think the point is that even if we didn't have the nukes, we would want the submarines. They are just about the only naval vessels capable of going anywhere and doing anything (other than flying off aircraft) with at least a reasonable prospect of evading detection and being blown to Kingdom Come by any tiresome bloke in an aircraft that happens to be passing.<br /><br />Whether we need the nukes is another question entirely - quite apart from all the ethics, it is hard to see how they are likely to be of much use now, and therefore I would not be sorry to see them go - but I would be doubtful of the value of getting rid of our nuclear submarine fleet.The Half-Blood Welshmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05072936624444891100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-37826169831283295352009-06-23T00:23:40.428+01:002009-06-23T00:23:40.428+01:00You can have nukes without submarines, which are a...You can have nukes without submarines, which are anyway under the control of the US at least as much as the UK. If we want an independent nuclear deterrent, then we could base it on carriers, silos and aircraft without reference to the US. It would also be less than half the price...Cicerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02090838836212624633noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-85493954626766344872009-06-22T13:27:52.404+01:002009-06-22T13:27:52.404+01:00Thats a little disingenuous the Liberal Party is...Thats a little disingenuous the Liberal Party is the home from home for ex CND campaigners hippies and peace and love merchants to whom the notion of a “Nation “ at all is an unpleasant smell they are obliged to put up with . So it is certainly flaky on defence , having said that I am not at all sure you are not right on Trident . I doubt we could afford it and my hard choice is to admit were are an impoverished Nation and get out of Theatres we cannot afford to properly engage with . Many Conservatives would , with some sadness accept this , conservatism after all is not internationally expansive necessarily <br />If however Nick Clegg is suggesting that the same funds should better spent on more effective weapons then his use of the words “Hard choices “ as if this was part of a fiscal retrenchment is deliberately misleading <br /><br />It seems once again that cakes are being retained as well as eaten and until very recently Clegg was vociferously quoting years of foreign policy experience which taught him that without your prestige Nukes you had no say whatever the strategic arguments might be , put in this occasion by Mr. Huhne .<br /><br />Bit of a dogs breakfast then but not quite wrong for all thatNewmaniahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11922161971821380803noreply@blogger.com