strichener Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Fair play. My skin is thick though. I'm loving the banter. Not just your skin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatguyspage Posted September 12, 2014 Author Share Posted September 12, 2014 Wants facts, given facts, refuses to read facts. Brilliant. You must be a fucking whizz at parties. There are no facts. What's hard to understand about that? Even the snp will admit there are no facts yet. Everything will get decided after the election in the event of a yes vote. Right now... There's nothing in stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatguyspage Posted September 12, 2014 Author Share Posted September 12, 2014 Not just your skin. Boom boom. I see what you did there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracowjambo Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Yeah but right now Faslane is a base for the entire allied fleet. When it's just Scottish defence it'll be less than a tenth of the size, with no American ships / subs or other allied countries that we currently service. There will be massive job losses. Especially in the nuclear sector. I exchanged about 8 emails with salmonds office about this matter and they just refuse to admit it, but in admitting the scaled down nature of the new function for Faslane, they are admitting massive job losses. So it's not shutting down? You said it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatguyspage Posted September 12, 2014 Author Share Posted September 12, 2014 ARMAGEDDON thank f**k we have nukes We won't have if salmond gets his way :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatguyspage Posted September 12, 2014 Author Share Posted September 12, 2014 So it's not shutting down? You said it was I said decommissioned. Not shutting down.... I guess that's ambiguous.... It will be massively scaled down. Massively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracowjambo Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 We won't have if salmond gets his way :-) What a c**t salmond is. How dare he get rid of WMDs. The very thing that we've went to war over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperTon Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Yeah but right now Faslane is a base for the entire allied fleet. When it's just Scottish defence it'll be less than a tenth of the size, with no American ships / subs or other allied countries that we currently service. There will be massive job losses. Especially in the nuclear sector. I exchanged about 8 emails with salmonds office about this matter and they just refuse to admit it, but in admitting the scaled down nature of the new function for Faslane, they are admitting massive job losses. So you'd rather we spent billions of pounds keeping nuclear weapons that will never be used? That money could be better spent like stopping the poverty in our own country. Young children having to go to food banks but they'd rather spend their money on storing nukes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Boom boom. I see what you did there. Aye but I wasn't joking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 There are no facts. Do you wish to get all existentialist about all this? Technically there is nothing other than your own id. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 There are nine million bicycles in beijing Thats a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 There are nine million bicycles in beijing Thats a fact. Is having 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife, is that a fact? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatguyspage Posted September 12, 2014 Author Share Posted September 12, 2014 Yeah I agree it's a area that has pros and cons. I would like nuclear gone, but until everyone does it at once I don't think it's safe. Look at it like this... We get rid of nuclear. Who knows what the world will be like in 10 years. If it turns out we need them then, it's not a case of just bringing them back. It would take years to get back to where we are. Right now we're standing in a room and everyone is pointing guns at each other. Do you want to be the one to put your gun down first and be left open? Anyway this isn't all about Faslane. There are a ton of things that we don't know, and all I'm saying is, I believe the numpties in charge should have to come to agreement on at least some of the major issues and let us know before we need to decide on it. That's not unreasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatguyspage Posted September 12, 2014 Author Share Posted September 12, 2014 Do you wish to get all existentialist about all this? Technically there is nothing other than your own id. I dunno what id or ego have to do with this. You must be more clevererer than me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 That's not unreasonable? I'll tell you what is unreasonable is your complete lack of understanding when it comes to semantics within HTML5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillonearth Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Is having 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife, is that a fact? Apparently it's meant to be ironic. It isn't of course, it's just someone having a fuckton too many spoons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Is every finitely presented periodic group finite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Look at it like this... We get rid of nuclear. Who knows what the world will be like in 10 years. If it turns out we need them then, it's not a case of just bringing them back. It would take years to get back to where we are. Right now we're standing in a room and everyone is pointing guns at each other. Do you want to be the one to put your gun down first and be left open? Brilliant. We have another Alex Jones new world order tin foil hat wearer here. I was in Denmark the other day, they were absolutely shitting themselves as being a non-nuclear nation they were just waiting for the Russians to just roll in with their tanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatguyspage Posted September 12, 2014 Author Share Posted September 12, 2014 I'll tell you what is unreasonable is your complete lack of understanding when it comes to semantics within HTML5. It's not a lack of understanding it's laziness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thatguyspage Posted September 12, 2014 Author Share Posted September 12, 2014 Brilliant. We have another Alex Jones new world order tin foil hat wearer here. I was in Denmark the other day, they were absolutely shitting themselves as being a non-nuclear nation they were just waiting for the Russians to just roll in with their tanks. That's a silly thing for them to be worrying about. Are you sure something wasn't lost in translation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.