|
|
Post by supergas on Feb 9, 2016 11:24:09 GMT
Despite what @nobbygas is implying, WW1 ended and caused WW2 to start 21 years later. WW3 hasn't started in the last 70 years, so that's something. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 11:50:46 GMT
Despite what @nobbygas is implying, WW1 ended and caused WW2 to start 21 years later. WW3 hasn't started in the last 70 years, so that's something. That's what I've always thought! Germany were watered they had to give so much up at the end of WW1 they wanted to reclaim what they thought was theirs? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 11:57:02 GMT
Despite what @nobbygas is implying, WW1 ended and caused WW2 to start 21 years later. WW3 hasn't started in the last 70 years, so that's something. That's what I've always thought! Germany were watered they had to give so much up at the end of WW1 they wanted to reclaim what they thought was theirs? Um...err.......I think they wanted just a little bit more of what they thought was theirs. The next war? Will it be about resources ie. oil or water? As I implied earlier, in my view it has already started. It's not a war as people recognize war to be (Armies of Sovereign States fighting each other, in uniforms, with planes, ships, tanks etc). It's an ideological/religious war, and it will get nasty, really nasty, especially in Europe. Just look at what happened in the Balkans. |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Feb 9, 2016 15:43:10 GMT
Despite what @nobbygas is implying, WW1 ended and caused WW2 to start 21 years later. WW3 hasn't started in the last 70 years, so that's something. That's only because the 2nd world war ended in 1990 ,one of the reasons was as germany declared war and did not exist again until 1990 when a german government was formed for the first time since the beginning of ww2 ,only then could germany sign a declaration of the war ending, although another train of thought says ww2 will not end untill the eu is disbanded as the eu was founded on nsdap princaples |
|
|
|
Post by jaggas on Feb 10, 2016 19:21:21 GMT
Nobby bang on the money............. I am not sure which European country will be the first to say enough is enough when it comes to the downright pathetic appeasement of Islam.But you can be sure when one uprises then many will follow and that will be civil war on the streets of Europe.On one side it will be freedom and on the other it will be Islam.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiaww on Feb 11, 2016 9:44:14 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2016 9:55:30 GMT
A bar called 'Diamonds & Pearls', Frankfurt, circa December 2007. Too complicated to explain in detail, but if I knew then what I know now, I'd have legged it to the airport sharpish, screaming like a girlie, arms and legs flapping madly, to jump on the very first plane I could get, destination anywhere ! That's where I would change history. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Feb 11, 2016 10:25:04 GMT
A bar called 'Diamonds & Pearls', Frankfurt, circa December 2007. Too complicated to explain in detail, but if I knew then what I know now, I'd have legged it to the airport sharpish, screaming like a girlie, arms and legs flapping madly, to jump on the very first plane I could get, destination anywhere ! That's where I would change history. Was that the first time you tasted your wife's German sausage? |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Feb 12, 2016 13:16:18 GMT
That's what I've always thought! Germany were watered they had to give so much up at the end of WW1 they wanted to reclaim what they thought was theirs? Um...err.......I think they wanted just a little bit more of what they thought was theirs. The next war? Will it be about resources ie. oil or water? As I implied earlier, in my view it has already started. It's not a war as people recognize war to be (Armies of Sovereign States fighting each other, in uniforms, with planes, ships, tanks etc). It's an ideological/religious war, and it will get nasty, really nasty, especially in Europe. Just look at what happened in the Balkans. But to go back to my original point, WW3 probably hasn't started because of the US using nuclear weapons 'to win' WW2 and the subsequent nuclear powers getting permanent seats on the UN security council. This is a fun debate I have with my anti-Trident friends.....lose Trident and we lose any say in world matters full-stop, as the seat will no longer be permanent and we'll likely get it back in 2096(ish). The best place to win any ideological/religious wars is from the UN Security Council. So how many billion a year is that worth to keep our vote on that council to make sure ideological/religious wars are won by those who *we judge* are right and proper? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2016 13:19:50 GMT
But I think unless things change with the EU Referendum, we will lose that seat on the UN Security Council, and be replaced by an EU representative. Germany is aching to get a seat on that table, but never will on their own because they are a non-nuclear power. However, they can get that seat via the EU, which they control.
|
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Feb 12, 2016 19:29:14 GMT
But I think unless things change with the EU Referendum, we will lose that seat on the UN Security Council, and be replaced by an EU representative. Germany is aching to get a seat on that table, but never will on their own because they are a non-nuclear power. However, they can get that seat via the EU, which they control. Which is why we need to renew Trident if we want a seat at the top table... But this goes back to the original 'alternate history' nature of the thread. The only way Germany gets a permanent seat is (probably) if either the UK or France cease to be nuclear powers, and even then it's not clear what happens. As it stands, politics mean with a nuclear arsenal we're on the Council for the foreseeable future.... |
|
|
|
Post by jaggas on Feb 12, 2016 20:56:47 GMT
Which means we have a say when we leave the EU.
There isn`t a single reason to stay in the EU.
|
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,540 
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Feb 12, 2016 23:23:57 GMT
But I think unless things change with the EU Referendum, we will lose that seat on the UN Security Council, and be replaced by an EU representative. Germany is aching to get a seat on that table, but never will on their own because they are a non-nuclear power. However, they can get that seat via the EU, which they control. Why would we give it up and France not? The only way Germany would get a place on the Security Council is when there is a wholesale change and I have read a suggestion that a second tier without veto rights could be brought into an enlarged council. However I can't see that happening as others have an equally valid reason to have a place. Allowing India will upset Pakistan, Japan will upset South Korea, Brazil will upset other Latin American countries, Saudi Arabia will upset Iran, etc. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2016 23:30:02 GMT
But I think unless things change with the EU Referendum, we will lose that seat on the UN Security Council, and be replaced by an EU representative. Germany is aching to get a seat on that table, but never will on their own because they are a non-nuclear power. However, they can get that seat via the EU, which they control. Why would we give it up and France not? The only way Germany would get a place on the Security Council is when there is a wholesale change and I have read a suggestion that a second tier without veto rights could be brought into an enlarged council. However I can't see that happening as others have an equally valid reason to have a place. Allowing India will upset Pakistan, Japan will upset South Korea, Brazil will upset other Latin American countries, Saudi Arabia will upset Iran, etc. France and the UK will give their seats up. They will be replaced by an 'EU' seat, but as we all know, the EU is ruled by Germany. Germany themselves will not get a seat. |
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,540
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Feb 12, 2016 23:31:03 GMT
Which means we have a say when we leave the EU. There isn`t a single reason to stay in the EU. We have a say in world affairs now, nothing to do with the EU. Trading several voices in world affairs, such as Germany, France and ourselves for one EU voice would weaken Europe. A single EU voice is still one voice, it wouldn't be any louder. it is in all our interests for the UK and France, plus the rotating European voice(s) on the Security Council to stay. Just like the Home Nations are separate in FIFA and UEFA, four votes not one. |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Feb 13, 2016 12:44:36 GMT
Why would we give it up and France not? The only way Germany would get a place on the Security Council is when there is a wholesale change and I have read a suggestion that a second tier without veto rights could be brought into an enlarged council. However I can't see that happening as others have an equally valid reason to have a place. Allowing India will upset Pakistan, Japan will upset South Korea, Brazil will upset other Latin American countries, Saudi Arabia will upset Iran, etc. France and the UK will give their seats up. They will be replaced by an 'EU' seat, but as we all know, the EU is ruled by Germany. Germany themselves will not get a seat. Only way the UK would ever consider giving their seat up is if we somehow elect Corbyn....*shudders at the thought* |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2016 17:24:08 GMT
France and the UK will give their seats up. They will be replaced by an 'EU' seat, but as we all know, the EU is ruled by Germany. Germany themselves will not get a seat. Only way the UK would ever consider giving their seat up is if we somehow elect Corbyn....*shudders at the thought* Ive voted Labour my entire life, after his remarks about Tridant I wont vote for 'em while hes the leader. |
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,540
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Feb 13, 2016 17:41:21 GMT
Only way the UK would ever consider giving their seat up is if we somehow elect Corbyn....*shudders at the thought* Ive voted Labour my entire life, after his remarks about Tridant I wont vote for 'em while hes the leader. These won't help him. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35566480www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35569094i can't see Vlad allowing his PM to say this without prior approval. What I don't really appreciate is that JC's objection is so strong he will split the party over something that will get passed regardless of a Labour block vote. He should allow a free vote and let any decisions over his views be part of the next manifesto in 2020. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Feb 13, 2016 20:09:52 GMT
There is no one left to vote for.
|
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,540
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Feb 13, 2016 20:14:18 GMT
There is no one left to vote for. I'll vote for you Hugo, after all don't owls gather in a parliament? |
|
