aintforever

But when they fall it's nightmare, all due to Brexit.

I don't see why the EU should have such an issue with free movement, the British people have decided that they don't want any old **** turning up in their country and they should respect that and do a deal that is best for Europe trade wise - that is obviously no tariffs as they sell more to us than we do to them. Control of immigration is obviously a red line for the tories, if the EU won't budge then I guess it will be a clean break.

I expect it is a very complex and delicate operation to handle these weapons safely. That wont stop a bunch of suicidal maniacs trying though.

They are probably not bothered about that either.

I think a better plan would be to equip our troops better so that when they end up in some Middle Eastern ****hol they don't have to borrow kit from the yanks. Being part of NATO an ally of the US and in Europe is enough to warn off any imaginary bogey men you think is about to nuke us. Sure we don't have crystal ball but there are other greater risks out there that could be minimised with £30 billion. There are hundreds of countries that don't have nukes, are they all in danger?

If the crackpot in charge doesn't give a **** then MAD would not work so we would still be nuked and then just kill hundreds of thousands of innocents in crackpot's country - great plan!

Really? I'm not sure what either would have to gain by having a war with us. Has either ever tried to invade us? Sure we don't ever know what is around the corner but is blowing £30+ billion on some new nukes seems madness to me. Today's world is so so different to WW2 days, we should invest in more relevant defence. Chances are our next military involvement will be fighting insurgents somewhere in the Middle East, best spend money on the best equipment available for our troops, more special forces, drones, apaches etc.

Complete waste of money, relic of the cold war. Would be better off targeting terrorism and insurgency in places we've ****ed up.

But do you agree if they did vote to leave the UK WHEN they have the referendum then its a fair possibility that neither Scotland or England and Wales would have got what the voters wanted? If it was a simple vote - stay in the EU as UK or leave and split up the UK, do you really think the majority would choose leave?

Because it was a pretty close vote last time when being part of the EU was one of the reasons to stay in.

That's the elephant in the room. Leaving the EU will mean another referendum for the Jocks and as it stands it would be a nailed on vote out of the UK. That would have ramifications for Northern Ireland as well. I doubt many who voted for Brexit would want the UK broken up AND out of the EU. So if the government press ahead then they could be going against the will of the people and the majority of MPs. A second referendum on Brexit would be daft if it was the same question but if the Jocks are going to have one anyway surely it is fair to let the people of England decide if they want to be in a UK in the EU or just England and Wales out - because that is effectively the choice.

Does it matter if we break EU law when we are leaving anyway?

How much business is actually done in these trade deals anyway? The company I work for makes most it's money from getting stuff made in China and sold mainly in the US. We do some business with EU countries and Russia but in the main it's made in China because they have cheapest labour and sold in the States because they have most to spend. You can go online and buy something cheap direct from the factory in China - what 'trade deal' does that involve?

I don't believe the Big Bang theory either. I think it's just the human obsession with orgasms that makes them believe every had to begin with a big explosion. I reckon Earth has just always been there. Nothing happened to create it, no begin or end, it's just there.

I think May's waffle about the Union points to how she will wriggle out of Brexit. Fact is Brexit will more than likely mean the break up of the UK and even the Tories on the right will not fancy that.

So they are trying to offload three high-earners and the best the chairman can come up with is "they are not useless".

Never had a vote for PR though. That vote was a joke anyway, it was just used as a stick to beat Nick Clegg with. All the red and blue sheep just followed their leaders. I guess the same might happen again but the current mess is purely down to infighting between two sets of weirdos who make up both parties. The Corbyn farce and Brexit thing just shows how extreme the views of party members are. If the tories ever had a massive brain fart and elected a leader Labour's way then you would end up with a right nazi in charge. What would the options be then?

More like one was advisory and one never happened. The sooner we get PR and get rid of this red v blue ****** the sooner we might sort out the mess we are in. The refurendum just turned into a internal squabble between a bunch of ****** tories, Labour is a complete mess, hopefully this current crisis will be the end of both.

Another one gone, this is getting silly now. We had better buy a decent replacement.

Eagle, seriously! Just when the country desperately needs a decent opposition this is the best the Labour party can do. **** me what a mess. I know appearance are not everything but it does count and that ugly ***** won't ever get elected as PM. labour need too sort their **** out because if they can't even sort out an decent leader how the hell are the country supposed to trust them to run the country.

Choosing not to vote IS having a say. You are saying you don't care either way.

What a load of typical arrogant British ******.

Parliament is sovereign but this government was elected on the promise of holding a refurendum, in their judgement this was an issue that the people should decide and the people chose to leave. The question was simple, the positives and negatives of both options clear and the peoples decision was clear. In theory the government could ignore the result but that would be a very dangerous route to take in a country where huge amounts of people are obviously already ****ed off.

Well what a surprise, a demo against Police shooting blacks turns into a shoot-out. Guess their plod have figured out what happens if you go round shooting people in a country where you can buy assault rifles over the counter.

I think it would take a bigger stretch of the imagination to think that the US would spend £2 trillion on a war because Saddam Hussein was a rather nasty man.