problem is its the one country i can actually see deciding to use it. I can't see any other country using them now adays.

 

If he does... then we can have a war for the right reasons, not under some false pretense of "you need some of this here peace"

 

If a nuke goes off, its too late. That's the problem

 

A nuclear war for the right reasons? Even the most ardent non interventionist must see that that outcome might be something to avoid, whatever may be involved, rather than waiting for the inevitable.

 

No you have not. Neutrality was declared in the 1930's, when they welcomed the German's in, check your history. Tell the victims of IRA atrocities, Catholic or Protestant, that Eire is neutral.

I'd check your neck tattoo for spelling while you are at it.

 

War only happens if there is oil, gold, minerals or strategic military positioning to be gained. Anything other than that it just wont happen, so I dont think we really have anything to worry about...

 

I don't think any of the western nations of the European mainland are oil rich?

 

Referring to when the yanks/england feel the need to intervene in other countries its due to them reasons chief

 

You find it's the brita that treated us lol he dogs raping murdering robbing in this island for 400 years Ita you needs to check your history

 

your still hated on this island today
Pity more of your Black and Tans weren't wiped out on these shores

 

Who referred to the British in Eire? Not me.

You stated that Eire was neutral and always had been, you are wrong. Check your history.
You have again demonstrated your inability to understand truth and not fiction.
What normally follows is a rant in some incomprehensible script.
It is like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

And it begins

 

Good to see that people are 'moving on'

 

Specifics

 

Iraq, libya and syria

 

How much Iraqi, Syrian or Libyan oil have we managed to nick?


I know it sounds like a neat theory, and you can hang all your anti-western hatred upon it, but the facts don't actually support your argument

 

These countries were not nuclear capable and therefore could not have initiated a nuclear war. Despite evidence to the contrary these countries were not led by madmen. There is little/no chance that the West would start a nuclear war with North Korea. The great fear is that the North Koreans might start one with us. Do we wait for this to happen?

 

Assumptions are not good for you Martin

 

Really?

 

What reason would NK have to start one with us though?

 

FFS, if only I understood what this says! I guess it's a problem for you trying to type while frothing at the mouth

 

They don't need to start one with us, they just need to start one with S. Korea or Japan. The end result will be the same.

 

Proof or more assumptions?

 

btw - I'm advocating that we start a war with N.Korea. But I ask is that we work out the consequences of any action we do or don't take.


For me this is like a madman loose in the streets with a gun, threatening to shoot people. In that instance to you try and take the gun off him, or wait until he actually shoots someone?

 

What assumption would that be?


The US is treaty bound to protect Japan and South Korea, that isn't an assumption, it a fact.

 

He has had said "gun" for quite some time, not shot anyone in all that time why start now?

 

Then let Donald and the USA crack on, nothing for us to get involved with

 

Yup true that banny leave the yanks sort it out

 

There wasn't even the merest suggest that the UK were going to be involved anyway.