What a hero really makes you think

All the cucks and leftsits on my facebook are sharing this today
>We don't need nuclear weapons

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=XyJh3qKjSMk
youtu.be/5ZPVqoF7j5M
youtube.com/watch?v=JKbDKsNsjac
gov.uk/winter-fuel-payment/what-youll-get
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8304654/WikiLeaks-cables-US-agrees-to-tell-Russia-Britains-nuclear-secrets.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It goes with their whole ideology. They don't understand how projection of power works

Leftists in this country literally can't understand how the populace being highly armed would keep the government corruption lower than it would be if we were all disarmed

They should sell the weapons to the middle east.

yeah starving middle easterners could eat those weapons

These people don't understand the word deterrent do they?

If we all abolish our militaries, we would have world peace amirite?

If Trump doesn't win then humanity needs to die out already. It is just too stupid to bear. I'm all for AI superintelligence at this point

The point is that America has in the last 16 years increase the military budget at the cost of american stability.

She fucking triggers the shit out of me I don't even know why she's a politician. She just parrots whatever the left wing establishment is saying and eats up all this cringey autistic 'Omg she's a young woman and she's an MP this is a first for Scotland'.

I live in Glasgow and I despise the SNP, but we've always been stuck with either Labour or SNP because everyone in this once great country is now left-wing brainwashed to the point of being beyond hope.

...

If nuclear weapons are a deterrent, I don't see why every country shouldn't have them.

It's all a ploy by our (((politicians))) to pussify us. First, give women political power. Then appeal to their feels and ego, and watch the sisterhood gather exponentially increasing momentum down the slippery slope to the NWO.

>Admitting they can't afford all their social programs
>Wanting more social programs
The reason they don't need nuclear weapons to defend themselves against commies is because they became commies themselves

This. It's like the Second Amendment for countries. Gun owners must get a license and a permit. Countries with nukes should adopt the western liberal world order.

if you kill wites the jews win and win over dunecoons and nigchimps

But keep the remote for yourself.

Well of course.

>Mhairi Black

Yes lets take our quotes from some 20 year old MP who only got into parliament because of the party she was in

Are left cucks aware that nukes are the only thing that have keep the world from big armed conflicts(like in bigger than WWII) and therefore the only thing that keep them in their comfy socialist bubble since the end of WWII?
Also, fuck (((Oppenheimer))) for creating them

Britain maintains a minimum possible deterrent. We have the smallest arsenal on the security council and only have one sub on patrol at a time.

We could not be running a smaller viable deterrent if we tried.

I don't understand why the SNP are against trident anyway. Provides jobs

Really made my brain cogitate tbqh.

I don't know why we shouldn't make nuclear poicy based on the words of someone 2 years out of high school

I love Mhairi!

I wish I could vote SNP in England

Mhairi is proof of why we don't need our politicians to go to Eton to be intelligent

>Trident costs £160 billion for a system that lasts about 40 years
>Trident protects Britain from being nuked
>the left call it too expensive

>EU costs £13 billion a year, or £520 billion over the same time frame (and that's assuming that the UK's contributions don't go up, which they have been doing steadily)
>the EU doesn't protect the UK from anything
>the left tells people that it's only a few quid per person per year and that people shouldn't get so worked up about such a small sum of money.

It annoys me when this shit is brought up. I had a debate with my politics graduate friend about the same thing.

He said something along the lines of 'we have enough nuclear weapons (as though scrapping trident would leave us with working nuclear weapons ready to launch) blah blah, its a huge part of the national budget, nuclear detterance doesnt work, the americans would shoot down any nukes shot at us (which isnt true) blah, blah blah"

I dont get how people dont understand that nuclear dissarment would only have an effect if every country in the world did it simeltaniously (which would never happen) and even then would only work until a smaller country was developed enough to create nuclear weapons. If the technology is there then other countries WILL use it. Left wing people in cuckistan spout how being in the EU has stopped war happening at our borders in the last 70 years and totally ignore the effect that nuclear detterance has had on our country's power in the world stage. On top of that theres the fact that we have no idea who our enemies will be 40-50 years down the line. Detterence is only useless if you live in a cuck tale fairyland where every country shares your faggy liberal western values. We dont live in one of those worlds and detterance is a nessicary defense in the modern age. It creates a position that is too high stakes for any country opposing us to be insane enough to take.

>a 20 year old in politics
How did britbongs let this happen?

Or to the jews

Good Christ the SNP are fucking stupid.

Idiot idealists living in a delusional little bubble

Why would you need nukes when you're best friends with several countries that do have them.

If you were that fucking parinoid about being attacked then you wouldn't place your entire miltary dependence on the ally in the first place. And it isn't like the UK is going to get zerged by Russia.

Porridgewogs went off the deep end

We don't 'need' the disabled, the unemployed or the elderly either desu

and then come kebab behead the lefties and make the first word country a 3rd word one like the IKEA guys ...

You really think if the ME (not greatest ally) /Africa/SA broke out in all out war, we'd nuke them?

I'd agree it works for two mutual powers, but others could argue that the UN is the reason for the decrease in major wars as well. And god knows the cold war was a huge a nightmare as well.

>I don't like war and weapon make me think of war and therefore I don't want weapon

Comfort kills more surely than any enemy.

I've been asking myself this too.

I would really love to know who her parents are. It doesn't say anything about her family on her wikipedia page, which makes me somewhat suspicious in and of itself

We don't need nukes though, you silly classcucks.

youtube.com/watch?v=XyJh3qKjSMk

Well to be in the UN big 5 council ?
It`s better to have some than not to have one see Ukraine for the best if they didn't abandon them in the 90's the Crimea whould be ...

She has a point.

What's the point of having nukes, which deters Russia from invading you, when you're already being invaded by much more destructive sandniggers?

I don't understand one thing:

Why are the accelerating it so much? If they would have slow boiled us, we would barely have any support.

Do they not understand nuclear deterrence or MAD doctrine? When countries like Russia and China also have nuclear arsenals having your own is a huge defense against them being used on you. I guess I'm expecting too much of leftists to actually understand how a military works.

Also, the
>Hurr durr how will we pay for everything else
is a retarded argument when maintaining nukes would barely deny the national budget and the fact that the U.K. wastes money on immigrants anyway.

Cold War's over, bro.

prevents a situation to get worse.

Its bad to have shit tone of child raping pakis but millions of squatting vodka niggers are much WORSE!

I rarely agree with leftists but on this one I do.

The UK has absolutely no need for nukes. They're a massive expense, they're so powerful and indiscriminate in effect you would never dare to use them anyway, and any deterrent effect their possession might give is redundant with the US nuclear 'umbrella' that the UK enjoys regardless.

Plus just having them gives every nutjob you lot elect as PM for 2 weeks delusions of grandeur and the ability to cause waaaaay too much trouble under its influence.

Does someone want to define the word "deterrent" to this mongo?

>you would never dare to use them anyway
youtu.be/5ZPVqoF7j5M
kek suck it ameriburger

The threat of war has always existed on Earth. War isn't a a late 20th century phenomenon.

A military is probably the most important of public expenses, together with a court system

youtube.com/watch?v=JKbDKsNsjac

>The only source of funding for those things is to decommission nuclear missiles
Although, to be honest, they could just not have nukes since the US would happily spot them a few if the need for them ever arose

Yeah, but the end of it didn't magically cause complete nuclear deproliferation. They still exist and they are still a threat.

it never did end bro.
Get your facts right.

It as half time.

Except our PM said flat out "yes" to the question of using them.

Quick quiz Americlap name the last 3 PMs of the UK.

Before you ask: Obama, Bush, Clinton.

> best friends
Not if one or the other parties get into power in those allies countries apparently. IMAGINE if Trump were elected!!! We would want our own arsenal to resist against the inevitable attempts at fascist subjugation. If they has phrased it as efficiency and alternative measures then that would be great but all they are doing here is weakening force projection.

...

>Russia
>nuclear threat
Real life isn't Modern Warfare 3. The reason they got nukes in the first place was as a defense from UK and US.

Nukes are useless now anyways, you can just hack them and turn off the atoms.

>A military is probably the most important of public expenses, together with a court system

Basic public order, really, so courts plus enforcement. But pretty much exactly that.

Of course, in almost any situation, the military is going to wind up being much more expensive, if you want it to be at all effective.

UK is a permanent member of the big 5. Short of the country getting split and nuked then nothing will change.

The arguments of fear and division have finally started eating itself.

The left everyone.

wtf blair that fat labor guy and cameron.

Can't remember fat labor man because he did essentially nothing and was not the restoration of 'old labor' as he was wished to be, as far as I remember.

There's so much wrong in this its untrue. We caqn afford all that shit, no-one in Britain goes without. What can't give them is beyond what they need to live, because its unfair on everyone else and we would very quickly NOT to be able to look after them is public spending went up too high.

This. This is the sort of stupidity you get when you put a woman in charge of contemplating war, violence and weapons.

This is where it leads to.

No offense, no defense, a multitude of dependents.

Literally weapons grade retardation, best weapon Russia ever invested in. It has done what their nukes, bombs, tanks or troops could have never done, conquer Britain.

She makes a good point (it would be nice) but she's still a fucking retard because you NEVER want to be the first to disarm.

It's basically, "Muh feels, ignore reality," when it comes to national security.

>cuck asks loaded question about "innocent men, women and children"
>May shuts him down
>gasps in the audience

Anyone who gasped at the leader of a country saying they would use their nukes is a cuck who has no place in parliament. If you voted for them you're an idiot.

So naive. Do you really think no one will ever become ambitious to take over people, land and resources ever again?

>women
>working together
It doesn't work like that.

HAHAHA enjoy getting nuked Britbong.

Just like if we give everyone a huge pile of gold we'll all be rich

Who cares.
She's from a meaningless protest party which will never have any power in Westminster, and the debate on nuclear weapons is closed until at least 2050 after the anti-nukers got royally BTFO in last nights vote.

>can't afford to pay pensions on time
>blank cheque
>useless weapons

like, why bother doing any research when you know your followers don't?

I don't know much about her but this bit sounded like modern day Thatcher.

Based.

...

We need better rates of employment. For that, we need better education and training. Raise the education and skill level of the population, the workforce will become more valuable. Too many people are mouldering on benefits because they see no option for a brighter future. Slave labour isn't the answer btw. A culture change is essential.

Well the new windbag is called May, the buy before was Cameron, and before that I want to say Tony B. Liar but I know there was at least one more in between them.

See it makes sense to know who the President is, they have set terms and once one is elected it's a pretty good bet he's going to be in office at least 4 years. You guys can change PMs on a whim. Ms May may be out of office next week, I only remember her name because I read an article about her the day she took office which wasn't very long ago.

>For that, we need better education and training.

Genius! If only you were a politician!

>If only you were a politician!
Actually I am Teresa May, so watch the attitude buster.

To be fair, employment isn't that bad at the moment. Its significantly improved with the Tories.

You understand that a PM change has little to no meaning in a westminster parmliment system where majority rules right? Shes just a figurehead of her cabinet, its not like america where a country votes for a candidate, the country votes for the goverment party and the candidate is secondary.

Deaths and slave labour used for the official statistics do not count.

I'd argue the only reason we will never loose our seat on the UN security council, is because we're one of the nuclear powers, it allows us influence far beyond our size, and by 2056 economy.

>For that, we need better education
UK has some of the best universities in the world at a bargain bin price. Yes, 9k a year is a bargain when talking about an investment that dramatically increases your earning potential for the rest of your, provided that you don't choose a worthless degree of course.

t. graduated from a UK uni (back when it was 3k a year, which was daylight robbery on my part)

They voted to keep them by a landslide

omg, I hate nukes now

>leftist equate working in a safe factory for 8 hours for a lot more than their labor is worth to be "slave labor"

You got a good deal. That's what degrees ought to cost. However, I'm not talking about university education here. I mean something for people for whom that isn't on the agenda. The sorts of people who have become an underclass. I honestly don't think it used to be like that.

Don't patronize us, Leaf. It doesn't matter why they got them in the first place. Both sides have them and in the event of another world war they would certainly be a possible factor.

Bullshit they died. Evey time it goes below 0 pensioners get a heating allowance of £200, how do I know? Because my elderly neighbour uses her payment to go line dancing in Barcelona with her friends.

>gov.uk/winter-fuel-payment/what-youll-get

Working for subsistence wages worth less than half of minimum wage that can be cut at any time for things such as attending a job interview is slave labour, yes. Compulsory education to gain practical qualifications is better than working in Poundland for free. That system is Jew as fuck.

>think of the muslim children of Luton and Birmingham

have you got no soul?

he never said this, wish people would stop posting it

>if he said that, his enemies would win

How much do the nukes cost? I thought they were pretty cheap to maintain.

With her logic you might as well dismantle the military.

I fucking hate how liberals have no idea where a country's wealth comes from.

Our primary enemy is Islam.
Our government is far too cucked to ever nuke the middle east, or London.

The only threat we pretend to legitimize usage against, is 'BIG BAD RUSSIA' who have a stockpile of 4500 nukes, 1800 deployed.

I believe that the United States has similar amounts. However these numbers are probably way off for both countries, because it is only what they have declared.

We have 215 warheads and our primary 'enemy' has been given sensitive information on Trident.

>Information about every Trident missile the US supplies to Britain will be given to Russia as part of an arms control deal signed by President Barack Obama next week.

>Defence analysts claim the agreement risks undermining Britain’s policy of refusing to confirm the exact size of its nuclear arsenal.

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8304654/WikiLeaks-cables-US-agrees-to-tell-Russia-Britains-nuclear-secrets.html

>but we can afford millions of non-whites who drag us down

>wage
>slave labor

Don't think you understand what you're talking about.

>Compulsory education to gain practical qualifications is better than working in Poundland for free

No it isn't according to employers. Most people who leave Uni can't find jobs because no-oone gives a shit that they smoked weed for 5 years and got an art degree.

>for free

I thought you said subsistance wage?

>hurf durf i'm an autistic mongol rape baby

kys turk in denial

>How much do the nukes cost?
£178 bn

Originally, they underestimated it and that caused a shitstorm.
It's about $200bn. But that's for the lifetime operation.
>I fucking hate how liberals have no idea where a country's wealth comes from.
In the mind of the liberal, money is created by the government to give them as welfare.

Cutting welfare checks to the indigent is definitely more important than being able to defend yourself from hostile nations and groups.
-- Typical Leftist