Firstly, "in charge" in respect to our Shirl must always be used in the broadest of terms, as we are well inside Chocolate Teapot territory.
Further, I totally expect Shirl to decide that we should give up OUR weapons and programmes as a "sign of good faith" to all other nations. Yes, I do think so, and my tea-soaked brain seems to recall that was her position in the past. I will say that again: I predict Shirley Williams will move to abandon our own weaponry as a unilateral gesture to encourage others. She is a self-loather par excellance.
This then leads me to suspect that Brown really does want to abandon the UK as a national and international entity, happy for it to be a province in the European Union of Soviet Socialist Regions. Of course, France will perform the suave moves they are famous for by promising to drop their own weapons if only the UK does too (they have form). Of course, once the UK
Removal of the UK's nuclear capability is necessary to prevent the UK being capable of UDI form the EU. It is all part of the plan. Watch them go about it.
4 comments:
I am not so sure on that one - wouldn’t rule it out entirely mind you, our Gordon is a pretty twisty dude who likes to kill a whole flock of birds with one stone, not 'just' two.
I think this is the same Broon strategy that had him trying to lure Paddy Ass-down into his cabinet. Trying to discommode Ming-the-Merciless and Dave the Chameleon.
I expect he wants us to forget all about the EU Constitutional ‘Treaty’, by the way there is an e-petition here against it. The more the merrier. I expect they will pay at least as much attention to it as the road toll one, but still, nothing ventured…
I dunno, is it actually absolutely necessary to have nuclear weapons to be an independent country? Surely 90% of countries in the world don't have them?
Mark - Yes but approximately 100% of non nuclear countries are effectively client/allies of one or more of the ones who do...
Phil A, fair point.
Post a Comment