If you're not ready to use nukes, MAD doesn't work. So, what's to stop a nuclear country from just taking what it wants?
But you're just saying you'd never use them you're not like scuttling the submarines and filling in the silos, the pistol is still loaded and pointed in your face
Right, so when you say you'll "never use them" you are just ... lying? All the politicians saying they'd never use them are just demonstrating they are liars?
I guess the question is also perfectly reasonable that way too. "I'd like to ask all of you directly which of you is a bald-faced liar. Show of hands please."
But at the same time, anyone who says they will use them is lying. The whole idea of MAD is that everyone has a button to destroy the opponent, so no one ever should nuke an opponent, or be immediately nuked themselves in retaliation.
It is a silly question to which the only right answer is supposed to be "yes, if an opponent nukes us"
What? No. The whole idea of MAD is that you will 100% use nukes in retaliation. That's what MAD means. You will absolutely use your nukes is what the entire thing is built on. It's not a lie in any way, shape or form to be saying "Yes, I would use them". So unless the question is specifically "Would you use them in a first strike", the answer is supposed to be "Yes".
And frankly, the question of "Would you use nukes in a first strike?" is also itself a question worth knowing the answer to.
It doesn't matter what they answer though. No one is going to invade a nuclear power because the PM answered "no" at some point. They still have the nukes, so it's the same deterrent as always.
Weird question, but since there are a lot of Guardian readers here - anyone else having an issue just over the last day or two where a new page or a page refresh jumps right to the bottom of the page? I'm getting it in both Firefox and Edge on my PC, and Firefox on my phone.
Yup! noticed yesterday but could've been going a smidge longer than that
So there is a rumour that the Queen has died which appears to have spread to the point that people are repeating it without knowing where it came from, so if you run across it consider the source:
Including a lie like the Queen is looking forward to having Trump around does make me doubt the rest of the statement.
They can't exactly officially say on the record that "The Queen is fucking horrified that she's got to host that orange git yet a-fucking-gain". As funny as that would be.
They could have just said preparing. Whether that's making sure all the good cutlery has been laid out or downing a bottle of scotch can be left to the reader to decide.
Including a lie like the Queen is looking forward to having Trump around does make me doubt the rest of the statement.
They can't exactly officially say on the record that "The Queen is fucking horrified that she's got to host that orange git yet a-fucking-gain". As funny as that would be.
Would be one for the history books though
+5
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
possibility of john redwood losing his seat tantalisingly close...
I suspect a lot of horrible Tories are going to just keep their seats because not enough people decide to vote tactically. Lots of close-ish races, but a rump of supporters for the Lib Dems/Labour who will never switch mean the progressive option can't get over the line.
Exactly the kind of place where a pact would mean no Tory MP, but Labour refuses to countenance them at all. I'm sure it'd be very difficult to put into action, as local parties don't want to simply roll over and let a rival win, but still.
They could have just said preparing. Whether that's making sure all the good cutlery has been laid out or downing a bottle of scotch can be left to the reader to decide.
Maybe we could talk Liz into taking him for a spin in a Range Rover and see what his diet of shit has done to his cardiovascular system.
No matter where you go...there you are. ~ Buckaroo Banzai
I suspect a lot of horrible Tories are going to just keep their seats because not enough people decide to vote tactically. Lots of close-ish races, but a rump of supporters for the Lib Dems/Labour who will never switch mean the progressive option can't get over the line.
Exactly the kind of place where a pact would mean no Tory MP, but Labour refuses to countenance them at all. I'm sure it'd be very difficult to put into action, as local parties don't want to simply roll over and let a rival win, but still.
It's definitely a problem. I'm sure those Labour and Green voters will be very happy with their Tory MP over a Lib Dem, not.
Raab, Johnson himself, Gove and many other absolute shitcannons could be scrabbling around for a lucrative career as a right-wing tabloid dickhead if Labour and the Lib Dems could agree to stand down against each other in their constituencies. I think Gove is in danger of losing his seat anyway, which would be exquisite.
Hang on, scratch that. I mean it may be close but the thing I read wasn't from a journalist but from a campaigner. Mistook their name for a similar one.
To be fair to Ken, at this point he's probably had the words "You're Ken Livingstone, you should know better, what are you doing?" shouted at him so many times he just tunes them out completely.
Particularly annoying is him shouting "You're trying to push me over" when the guy is clearly just trying to make him get his fucking foot out of the door because he's holding up the train.
Question to those of you living in the UK especially: as far as the apparent inability of the parties that either support Remain or a second referendum to work together in the coming election is concerned, do you think this is due mainly to the parties themselves, the political system or something else? I'm asking because I'm constantly amazed by how constructive cooperation seems to be entirely impossible in UK politics.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Partly it's the first past the post voting system, in which the number of votes doesn't matter, just who gets the most in each constituency. So the Lib Dems can poll 15% of the votes and get 3% of the MPs (and UKIP can poll 10% and get none).
Partly it's due to the parties themselves, with a leader saying "no pacts" and scuppering any chance that way. Labour still haven't forgiven the Lib Dems for the original 4 MPs leaving in the 80's to form the SDP and splitting the vote then, so they aren't likely to make nice now.
The Lib Dems, the Greens and Plaid Cymru have made an electoral pact to not stand in around 60 constituencies if the other parties have a better chance (in practice this basically means the Lib Dems get a slightly freer road than was otherwise the case), but the only one that'll really matter is if Labour and the Lib Dems sort something out.
In Scotland the SNP make a third (mostly) progressive party that's eating the lunch of both of the other parties, and I doubt they'll stand down anywhere as basically every Scottish seat is winnable for them, and their fundamental aim is so divergent from the way the other parties see things.
AV voting would solve some of this, as would PR voting. Electoral pacts would help salve the damage as well, though with how wildly some seats are swinging it'd be difficult to get hard evidence on who should stand down and where that would convince whomever was going to be the candidate and now has to sit at home and play Yahtzee on their own.
There is a combination of historical distrust, idealogical disagreement and personal dislike between the Labour Party and the Lib Dems. The SNP have good as won any seat in Scotland and the Greens are tiny.
In a lot of ways it's a shame Farage put his hands up and surrendered the Brexit party in such a craven fashion. The rightwing vote splitting would have been a great help.
Thanks for the answers.
Are there any countries where FPTP and de-facto two-party systems (though this seems to be weakening in the UK, even if the system doesn't really seem to reflect this well) have proven to be a net positive?
P.S.: On a different note: Has the style sheet for the forums changed? I don't remember there being these big spaces between paragraphs, since I used to put those in manually.)
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
It'll get worse if Johnson gets a majority, as the Conservative boundary changes will probably go ahead and make it even more difficult for other parties to win seats. It's arguable that the boundary changes would make the constituency distribution more equitable, but that's not the purpose of the Tories doing it. If they were interested in fairness and representation they wouldn't be pushing voter ID and never ever contemplating PR or AV voting.
Thanks for the answers.
Are there any countries where FPTP and de-facto two-party systems (though this seems to be weakening in the UK, even if the system doesn't really seem to reflect this well) have proven to be a net positive?
P.S.: On a different note: Has the style sheet for the forums changed? I don't remember there being these big spaces between paragraphs, since I used to put those in manually.)
I know some might disagree, but Australia fits that, for the most part. Two main parties (though the conservative party is really a permanent alliance of two parties, business and farmers, for all real purposes), a couple of smaller parties, and it works out mostly OK.
Our conservatives are rat bastards, but compared to the US and the UK conservatives, are relatively milquetoast. Our compulsory voting attendance*, and fairly stringent electoral funding and advertising laws means that true shitheels like Anning and Hanson are relegated to the fringes, because while they have rabid fanbases, the amount of more reasonable options, means they rarely get power, and when they do, it tends to be very limited.
* It's not compulsory to vote, you just have to attend the voting station and get your name marked off, but most people who get there, vote anyway. Meaning Australian elections aren't about turnout either.
My experience from Canada with the NDP vs Liberal split is that if you take the different groups on the left out from under the same umbrella and make them different parties, they will let the usual hate you see them display for each bloom into full blown "we will never cooperate with you" loathing. So you end up with the centre-to-left vote split no matter what.
The Lib/Lab split seems to have many similar qualities.
Thanks for the answers.
Are there any countries where FPTP and de-facto two-party systems (though this seems to be weakening in the UK, even if the system doesn't really seem to reflect this well) have proven to be a net positive?
P.S.: On a different note: Has the style sheet for the forums changed? I don't remember there being these big spaces between paragraphs, since I used to put those in manually.)
I know some might disagree, but Australia fits that, for the most part.
Except it doesn't because we don't have FPTP
To me that's a critical part of political disengagement which allows for the rise of populists - it's easier to feel like your vote doesn't matter under FPTP systems.
Thanks for the answers.
Are there any countries where FPTP and de-facto two-party systems (though this seems to be weakening in the UK, even if the system doesn't really seem to reflect this well) have proven to be a net positive?
P.S.: On a different note: Has the style sheet for the forums changed? I don't remember there being these big spaces between paragraphs, since I used to put those in manually.)
I know some might disagree, but Australia fits that, for the most part.
Except it doesn't because we don't have FPTP
To me that's a critical part of political disengagement which allows for the rise of populists - it's easier to feel like your vote doesn't matter under FPTP systems.
Thanks for the answers.
Are there any countries where FPTP and de-facto two-party systems (though this seems to be weakening in the UK, even if the system doesn't really seem to reflect this well) have proven to be a net positive?
P.S.: On a different note: Has the style sheet for the forums changed? I don't remember there being these big spaces between paragraphs, since I used to put those in manually.)
I know some might disagree, but Australia fits that, for the most part.
Except it doesn't because we don't have FPTP
To me that's a critical part of political disengagement which allows for the rise of populists - it's easier to feel like your vote doesn't matter under FPTP systems.
I thought you had Ranked Choice Voting, which is a form of FPTP. One that basically solves the vote splitting issue, but still first past the post.
Posts
It doesn't matter what they answer though. No one is going to invade a nuclear power because the PM answered "no" at some point. They still have the nukes, so it's the same deterrent as always.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
Seems to have fixed itself now. Fingers crossed.
Steam | XBL
(Guardian Media editor, bear in mind that if you read the thread it has screenshots of the whatsapp group including said dick pics)
There is no credible source at present claiming that the Queen has died
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/16/what-happens-when-queen-elizabeth-dies-london-bridge
Edit: also there's at least one outright lie in this tweet from the palace press office, why not two
Oh, the things Her Maj is forced to say.
Steam | XBL
If she was going to fake her death, now's the time to do it
Pop up on February 1st and feign surprise that people didn't realise that she was off hunting haggis on her estate
If that's her plan she really ought to consider the CKII method to speed things up.
They can't exactly officially say on the record that "The Queen is fucking horrified that she's got to host that orange git yet a-fucking-gain". As funny as that would be.
Steam | XBL
Would be one for the history books though
possibility of john redwood losing his seat tantalisingly close...
Exactly the kind of place where a pact would mean no Tory MP, but Labour refuses to countenance them at all. I'm sure it'd be very difficult to put into action, as local parties don't want to simply roll over and let a rival win, but still.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Maybe we could talk Liz into taking him for a spin in a Range Rover and see what his diet of shit has done to his cardiovascular system.
~ Buckaroo Banzai
It's definitely a problem. I'm sure those Labour and Green voters will be very happy with their Tory MP over a Lib Dem, not.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Labour should pull out and support the lib dems on this one. they have very little chance of winning.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
To be fair to Ken, at this point he's probably had the words "You're Ken Livingstone, you should know better, what are you doing?" shouted at him so many times he just tunes them out completely.
EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
Steam | XBL
You know who would've made the trains run on time?
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Bogart
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Partly it's due to the parties themselves, with a leader saying "no pacts" and scuppering any chance that way. Labour still haven't forgiven the Lib Dems for the original 4 MPs leaving in the 80's to form the SDP and splitting the vote then, so they aren't likely to make nice now.
The Lib Dems, the Greens and Plaid Cymru have made an electoral pact to not stand in around 60 constituencies if the other parties have a better chance (in practice this basically means the Lib Dems get a slightly freer road than was otherwise the case), but the only one that'll really matter is if Labour and the Lib Dems sort something out.
In Scotland the SNP make a third (mostly) progressive party that's eating the lunch of both of the other parties, and I doubt they'll stand down anywhere as basically every Scottish seat is winnable for them, and their fundamental aim is so divergent from the way the other parties see things.
AV voting would solve some of this, as would PR voting. Electoral pacts would help salve the damage as well, though with how wildly some seats are swinging it'd be difficult to get hard evidence on who should stand down and where that would convince whomever was going to be the candidate and now has to sit at home and play Yahtzee on their own.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Are there any countries where FPTP and de-facto two-party systems (though this seems to be weakening in the UK, even if the system doesn't really seem to reflect this well) have proven to be a net positive?
P.S.: On a different note: Has the style sheet for the forums changed? I don't remember there being these big spaces between paragraphs, since I used to put those in manually.)
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
It'll get worse if Johnson gets a majority, as the Conservative boundary changes will probably go ahead and make it even more difficult for other parties to win seats. It's arguable that the boundary changes would make the constituency distribution more equitable, but that's not the purpose of the Tories doing it. If they were interested in fairness and representation they wouldn't be pushing voter ID and never ever contemplating PR or AV voting.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
I know some might disagree, but Australia fits that, for the most part. Two main parties (though the conservative party is really a permanent alliance of two parties, business and farmers, for all real purposes), a couple of smaller parties, and it works out mostly OK.
Our conservatives are rat bastards, but compared to the US and the UK conservatives, are relatively milquetoast. Our compulsory voting attendance*, and fairly stringent electoral funding and advertising laws means that true shitheels like Anning and Hanson are relegated to the fringes, because while they have rabid fanbases, the amount of more reasonable options, means they rarely get power, and when they do, it tends to be very limited.
* It's not compulsory to vote, you just have to attend the voting station and get your name marked off, but most people who get there, vote anyway. Meaning Australian elections aren't about turnout either.
The Lib/Lab split seems to have many similar qualities.
Except it doesn't because we don't have FPTP
To me that's a critical part of political disengagement which allows for the rise of populists - it's easier to feel like your vote doesn't matter under FPTP systems.
The vast majority of the time it doesn't.
I thought you had Ranked Choice Voting, which is a form of FPTP. One that basically solves the vote splitting issue, but still first past the post.