Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

When the posts start getting personal and about 'you' having to justify yourself instead of concentrating on the topic. Just ignore it. It's not worth the bother.

I do hope your remark about "justify" does not include my use of the word as below:

.string. wrote: »

elantan wrote: »

Theres plenty evidence out there if you just look ... and dont ask me to as I am very well aware a lot of learning comes from actually doing the work yourself and I wouldnt want to deprive you

I don't think you can justify what you wrote that there had been environmental damage caused by weapons of mass destruction

???

What damage?

Surely you're not making that up!

The charge was that Weapons of Mass Destruction had caused environmental damage. It was surely not unreasonable to ask for some evidence to that charge.

I'm left with the impression that there was confusion between radiation leaks from Nuclear Power Plants and WMDs which are not the same thing. I recall that there was a report of leakage from one of the nuclear subs (which may or not been in the Polaris Fleet), but again a sub is not in itself a WMD and whether there was environmental damage is also something else.

It was an important point that was raised which deserved an answer, even a simple Oops!

Instead there is a derisive reply. This agro is not just one-way.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Tory's slash welfare, then the SNP get the blame from all other parties for having to raise taxes to pay for those same Tory cuts. Politically, I have to admit.. it's genius. But it might backfire in being, as Mr McWhirter states, a little TOO blatant.

The electorate are the ones to decide. After all it's their money. Welfare has to be paid for. Brown's welfare policies were based on a booming economy. Simply unaffordable. The SNP need to give people the choice of options. Rather than blame Westminster.

antrobus

.string. wrote: »

....I'm left with the impression that there was confusion between radiation leaks from Nuclear Power Plants and WMDs which are not the same thing. I recall that there was a report of leakage from one of the nuclear subs (which may or not been in the Polaris Fleet), but again a sub is not in itself a WMD and whether there was environmental damage is also something else....

Polaris? We haven't had Polaris since 1996.:)

I know that the Vanguard subs are powered by PWR. I suppose they could leak, and I think there was an example of the test reactor leaking recently, which meant that subs were going to be refitted. But I don't know whether any enviromental damage was identified.

I suppose the warheads could leak as well, but I'd be more concerned about one of them accidentally going off, even if it wasn't the full big bang.

Generali

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The electorate are the ones to decide. After all it's their money. Welfare has to be paid for. Brown's welfare policies were based on a booming economy. Simply unaffordable. The SNP need to give people the choice of options. Rather than blame Westminster.

Blame Westminster is all the SNP have though. To give them their due it does seem to be working.

Not enough to do something really stupid like voting for independence but still enough to fall for gimmicks instead of policies that are going to help the people of Scotland.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Thank you for your fine example of, well, proving my point Mr Baw Heed.

That was a very gentle piece of leg pulling. It was hardly Corbynista-style abuse.

If you think I was out of line feel free to report me. I find it amusing that someone feels the need to write stuff down on a web forum in such a way as to represent a Scottish accent.

I know these days people apologise at the drop of a hat. Frankly, if you found that offensive you need a much thicker skin.

elantan

.string. wrote: »

I do hope your remark about "justify" does not include my use of the word as below:



The charge was that Weapons of Mass Destruction had caused environmental damage. It was surely not unreasonable to ask for some evidence to that charge.

I'm left with the impression that there was confusion between radiation leaks from Nuclear Power Plants and WMDs which are not the same thing. I recall that there was a report of leakage from one of the nuclear subs (which may or not been in the Polaris Fleet), but again a sub is not in itself a WMD and whether there was environmental damage is also something else.

It was an important point that was raised which deserved an answer, even a simple Oops!

Instead there is a derisive reply. This agro is not just one-way.

I wasn't being abusive though ... you do seem to recall certain things about leaks ... the leaks to which I refer were not from nuclear plants

As I have previously stated I ain't here to convince anyone of anything my campaigning finished at 10pm September 18th 2014 ...

I looked all the info up before then so I was prepared for any questions, however new phone, new laptop means I don't have it to hand ... and I ain't gonna spend hours trawling the net looking for it again

The reason I suggested you did was because it obviously interests you and I remember learning about many many different things on my way to finding the answers to your question so thought you might like to as well :-)

It's hard to get that across though when your trying not to get caught in a lecture theatre with your phone, so u need to be fast and to the point

Certainly no abuse was meant by it or put down

kabayiri

Elantan : you seemed to suggest that the Nuclear sub base seemed to create environmental issues.

My point is that many things can give rise to environmental issues, such as oil. The common theme was "environment" obviously.

Did you know the humble house brick generates 100 times more radiation than background? Should that be a call to abandon house building in Scotland? Of course not! It's all part of the process of risk assessment!

elantan

Oh I agree so many things create environmental issues ... not just nuclear submarines

I have never suggested otherwise ... I just reckon if some one else wants them let them have them ... but the can pay for the clean up that needs done when they go

elantan

Just like I believe that the coal board should've been paying to clean up their mess when they shut down ... and to make the area safe ... I don't just feel that way about nuclear weapons

elantan

And eventually when we get rid of the oil platforms they should tidy their mess up as well ... is it so wrong to want companies and governments to be responsible for the mess they create ?