Do you really wan t this man in charge of the button

ivavoucher

David Cameron has put himself in a rather sticky position after citing China as a nuclear threat in last night's debate.
Discussing why Britain should keep Trident, the Tory leader said: 'Are we really happy to say that we'd give up our independent nuclear deterrent when we don't know what is going to happen with Iran, we can't be certain of the future in China, we don't know exactly what our world will look like?'
Labour immediately pounced on his comments and accused Mr Cameron of a serious gaffe.
Foreign Secretary David Miliband said: 'To put China and Iran in the same bracket is an insult to a fellow permanent member of the UN Security Council and to a country with whom we have just announced a close strategic relationship.'
Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian said that 'in a US debate, that would be hailed as a major gaffe, showing that the challenger was not ready to be commander-in-chief'
The Conservatives issued a statement whcih said: 'David Cameron was demonstrating the extent of uncertainties in the world, not saying China is a threat to the UK'.

"'David Cameron was demonstrating the extent of uncertainties in the world, not saying China is a threat to the UK" Pwww! it was a gaffe from Mr Bush ,, , I mean Cameron.

headcone

Wheezy wrote: »

As long as China is a dictatorship with nuclear capability it's a perfectly good reason.

Whether that may or may not be the case is not the issue.

Cameron showed himself to be incredibly naive and demonstrated his utter lack of diplomatic skill, which is an incredibly dangerous trait in a potential PM.

abaxas

headcone wrote: »

Whether that may or may not be the case is not the issue.

Cameron showed himself to be incredibly naive and demonstrated his utter lack of diplomatic skill, which is an incredibly dangerous trait in a potential PM.

Ermm.

It started in America!

N1AK

ivavoucher wrote: »

Cameron Says China Uncertainty Requires U.K. Nuclear Deterrent

He listed in as one reason, and personally I think it's a good one. China isn't a threat at the moment, but then Germany wasn't in 1922, Russia wasn't in 1935, Afghanistan wasn't in the 50's, and Iran wasn't in the 60's.

I'm not going to mark Cameron down for being willing to tell the truth. You'd prefer he sucked up to China, like politicians the globe keenly do, regardless of their actions?

Harry_Powell

If we do have a nuclear holocaust, will it reduce the price of houses?

headcone

Harry_Powell wrote: »

If we do have a nuclear holocaust, will it reduce the price of houses?

True but you can bet your sweet ars@ that if one estate agent survives,The price of rubble will rocket.

ivavoucher

N1AK wrote: »

He listed in as one reason, and personally I think it's a good one. China isn't a threat at the moment, but then Germany wasn't in 1922, Russia wasn't in 1935, Afghanistan wasn't in the 50's, and Iran wasn't in the 60's.

I'm not going to mark Cameron down for being willing to tell the truth. You'd prefer he sucked up to China, like politicians the globe keenly do, regardless of their actions?

On that reasoning he should have mentioned France the USA or Russia

A._Badger

PrivatisetheNHSnow wrote: »

LOL

What evidence is there that iran is developing weapons of mass destruction - you believe the western propaganda? it's the same 'evidence' that iraq had weapons of mass destruction?

you are a gullible idiot - It's israel, not iran that is the aggressor - israel has had illegal nuclear weapons for decades, israel has invaded egypt, syria etc in the past

Iran poses no danger to uk or us whatsoever - so why are we interfering? because we want to secure more oil supplies from the middle east maybe? put it this way - iran's military budget is $4.8billion, the us is $780 billion.

If you think attacking a country that is an ally of russia and china, and supplies vital oil supplies to china is a good idea, you deserve to be locked up - you're the kind of person who will start a nuclear war.

And you, the sort of pusillanimous ostrich who sat back complacently while Germany established its military might prior to WWII.

Iran not a threat? That's the funniest thing I've heard since people used to run around saying the USSR was a model of the perfect state and simply wanted peace and harmony.

JP45

Cameron's barking up the wrong tree. It's the French, not the Chinese, we need to worry about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wltv12Hx9Bo

shaven-monkey

Permanent seat on the security council (the people who make the wars) seems to require nuclear weapons.
In terms of protecting the national interest, being able to claim legitimacy through international law helps. Even if it is based on lies.