Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
its all academic anyway, I cant see the EU agreeing to any deal and Sunak is so wet that the status quo will remain.
Maybe, but the people of NI suffer with the power vacuum, the GFA is endangered, and only the Unionists/Loyalists can be blamed.
Would you agree considering they voted for something and are now having buyer's remorse?
Once again, last time I checked Britain had it's own sovereign Parliament, it's own legal and historical academics from world class universities, who attend Parliamentary Committees.
The idea that you and your comments on this obscure thread on an obscure internet forum based in Chicago mean anything, is just ridiculous, and the fact you claim to have left NI for Western Australia and now want to lecture to Britons is also ridiculous.
Nobody cares about your views or this thread, and this thread is not going to make any difference whatsoever.
I couldn't give a toss about your views, and neither could anyone else, and I have already wasted enough time on this obscure sub-forum on an internet site with only a few Britons on it.
As for the Protocol, it may look something like this, although further negotiations are on-going, so we will have to wait and see.
It's weird but for some reason our 'friends' from Europe and the other side of the pond seem to be unable to understand this! I think perhaps its because our 'friends' in the EU are told what to do by Germany via an un-elected un-Democratic European parliament and our 'friends' the other side of the pond can't tell the difference between a state and a sovereign state.
The UK is a sovereign nation with control over its own destiny, its not up to the EU to decide what the UK does with its own borders, it's not up to the US, Nigeria or China. Anything that applies to NI is done so due to UK diplomacy and nothing else, the decision on whether or not to put up a border ultimately lies with the UK government. Imagine our 'friends' trying to tell the Chinese what they can or cannot do with their borders!! China obviously are far less diplomatic.
Easthome, stop getting your info from the Daily Express and do some homework before you post false information again. It is tedious and frankly shows ignorance of the situation.
It is fine for you to think that way, yet those who supported Brexit in NI (predominately the Unionists) now want a do over because they do not like every aspect of it.
Talk about hypocrisy.
Like the old saying goes, you do not get to have your cake and eat it to.
The problem is the DUP bet everything on Brexit in the hopes that it would divide Ireland by creating a hard border economically but instead it backfired because it has in fact helped re-unify Ireland by keeping it connected seamlessly to the same market while to some extent disconnecting it from the UK market.
One of the main Unionist parties (UUP) was against Brexit however. Only the hardliners were for it and they suffered dearly in the latest election.
Maybe, but the people of NI suffer with the power vacuum, the GFA is endangered, and only the Unionists/Loyalists can be blamed.
Would you agree considering they voted for something and are now having buyer's remorse?
Hardline Unionism and their constant failed strategies has only pushed Irish Re-unification to happen sooner than anticipated. Anyone with some common sense could see that there was going to be no hard border. Their wet dream has now become a nightmare. If only they would give up their incessant hatred of their fellow countrymen they may then be able to navigate the political sphere rationally. They have been a complete disaster in recent years and become an embarrassment to moderate Unionism
Easthome, stop getting your info from the Daily Express and do some homework before you post false information again. It is tedious and frankly shows ignorance of the situation.
It's all propaganda from the UKIP party and Nigel Farage it's former Fuhrer. Keeping any signs of Welsh, Scottish and Irish nationalism at bay is one of it's policies.
Easthome, stop getting your info from the Daily Express and do some homework before you post false information again. It is tedious and frankly shows ignorance of the situation.
Read the link you posted please. Super Nukes. Super Nukes missiles contain multiple warheads, some over a dozen so 100 supernukes could potentially carry at least 1000 nuclear warheads therefore it's not 100 nukes but 1000 and again that is just an estimate. The UK therefore does not have even close to such a number of this or France and they don't have the same capability as the US, China or Russia to overcome missile defence systems. It doesn't even possess hypersonic technology therefore it is doubtful the UK could even strike a country like China or Russia. As i said though the arsenal they do have could destroy a few nations but they don't have the destructive capacity of the superpowers of the world. That isn't a bad thing at all. On the contrary at least the UK has some common sense
Russia's RS-28 Sarmat missile is the most advanced in the world. A hypersonic super Nuke that can Carry 15 nuclear warheads/bombs.
super nukes? I've never heard that term before. You seem to think it's some sort of revolutionary concept. It's not. The Minuteman III was the first ICBM that carried multiple, independently-target warheads (they're known as MIRVs). It was deployed in 1970.
most advanced in the world?
[snort]
This is the same system that was announced in 2014, to be deployed by 2020. It still isn't deployed. A test of the system was undertaken three days ago, on February 20th, so Putin could brag about it in his big speech the next day. Since the test was a failure, he didn't mention it.
Anyway, let's say it's deployed. So? The USSR deployed a 10-warhead variant of the R-36 in 1979 (the R-36MUTTKh). The United States' Trident II (deployed on 14 Ohio-class SSBNs, each with 20 tubes) has 12 warheads. That's 240 warheads per boat. The long-retired Poseidon SLBM (phased out as of 1992) carried 14 warheads. France's M51 SLBM can carry up to 10 warheads. China has multiple ICBMs capable of carrying 10 warheads.
Yet for some reason you're convinced that this Russian missile is some of groundbreaking weapon...
It doesn't even possess hypersonic technology therefore it is doubtful the UK could even strike a country like China or Russia.?
I have no idea why you think British SLBMs can't hit either Russia or China.
Note:
It's obvious that you have no idea what 'hypersonic missile' even means, given that you refer to the RS-28 as 'hypersonic'. There has been much hand-wringing lately over Chinese/Russian hypersonic missiles. These are cruise missiles, hypersonic variants of which is to what the term 'hypersonic missile' refers; no one actually calls an ICBM or SLBM a hypersonic missile, even though they are - in the same way that no one calls an artillery shell a 'ballistic missile' even though, in a literal sense, it is. Anyway, all ballistic missiles (both ICBMs and SLBMs) travel at hypersonic speeds. That is the only sense in which the RS-28 (which is not a cruise missile) is hypersonic. But in the same sense, the UK has hypersonic missiles, because it has SLBMs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy234
While you are correct about the UK nuclear summaries don't forget that each submarine can only carry 4 nuclear warheads. As for the US not having hypersonic missiles. The US has conducted succesful hypersonic tests in recent years so its safe to say they have the means now if they needed to fit nuclear warheads onto such missiles. It's that much of a game changer and no doubt a priority given the mess we are in.
It's official - you have no idea what you're talking about.
The United Kingdom's four Vanguard-class boomers, operate on CASD (Continuous At Sea Deployment), meaning that at any given time at least one and sometimes two are on patrol. Each Vanguard has 16 tubes (though the Royal Navy only utilizes 8 tubes at present), fitted with Trident IIs (previously mentioned). Each Trident II has 8 warheads. Again, these are hypersonic weapons in the same sense that the RS-28 is a hypersonic weapon, even though have claim the UK does not have hypersonic weapons while calling the RS-28 one.
By the way, Trident IIs have a range of ~7500 miles, such that a Vanguard on patrol in, say, the North Atlantic has all of the northern hemisphere in range, so contrary to your claim the UK can most certainly target all of Russia and China.
You are very confused in your reverence for Russia's long-delayed and recently-failed ICBM.
Something will be done soon , whether it appeases unionists is another matter , they get up each day with a siege mentality so can’t be seen to be satisfied no matter what, the EU and London are a lot more concerned with Putin right now
the unionists have a reasonable point about the protocol shortcomings but in a post Brexit world , Northern Ireland is always going to be in some ways operating differently to the rest of the UK, if a hard border wasn’t possible forty years ago, it sure as sugar ain’t feasible now, no London government would embark on such a massive project as it would gain no votes worthwhile, never mind the cost
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
China obviously are far less diplomatic.
