sizsells

So, now that an Ashington lad has been voted in, kiss goodbye to Bedlington from all OS and political maps for the next 5 years.

In the meantime, the council will continue to pi$$ money in Ashingtons direction - and what good has that done????

ASK the dozzy holes that voted him in from DEADLINGTON All I hear is we vote Labour cos me dad or me grandad DID or me aunt !*!@# and uncle !*!@# DID its that pathetic not to worry it was going to take a miracle anyhow

And he's from Ashington where they don't even know where Bedlington is!

ONLY AT ELECTION TIME AND THE SILLY BUGGERS FALL FOR IT EVERY TIME

Or Ian Lavery defects to conservatives and is tipped as future PM :lol:

you got your P for PRIME correct but you made a typo M is upside down it should be W for W"$&ker

PW

LOFL.... PMSL.... :lol: :lol:

IT just goes to show around here that not just Harold Shipman could get in for Labour this !*!@# gets in also seems hes not that thick after all I just wonder if he would be so popular with the " Labour voters" (sheep) as an Independant ? Now that would be VERY interesting

How long before we see the headlines...........The Lib Dem Con.

or ConDem Lib

Fair enough, with one concession........

This is a misunderstanding, and one widely proliferated by typically innacurate wikipedia article that i suspect you've accessed. Those five countries are the ones who openly ADMIT to having built their own nuclear weaponry, yet there are numeous others that are well known to have not only the capability to do so, but in some cases are believed to have done so. India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel - as you mention - are known factors, and Iran, Syria, Japan, a number of the middle east countries and a handful of others are widely believed to have nuclear capability. Furthermore, many countries are home to nuclear weaponry in good order - the former Russian states (the Soviet Union no longer exists) being notable as not only did many f the weapons stay in their bases upon the break up of the Union but their is a well known quite alarming discrepancy between the number of warheads that were around at that time and those that exist now (in other words, quite a large number have 'gone missing').

One other thing I will say is that your last line about free speech is interesting, and while it may well be in no way down to Nuclear Weapons it is certainly down to weapons per se; that nuclear weaponry was in its infancy at the time of the last world war is the reason for that, otherwise we would undoubtedly have been looking at the H-bomb as our saviour from a Nazi regime.

Well like I have said we will have to agree to dissagree.

We can all make assumptions about what will possibly happen in the future only time will tell though and as I dont consider myself an expert on the past, present or future for that matter I will leave it there for the mystics and misguided to fortell any woe .

Brown's bigoted remark shows just what a numpty he is! Everything the guy touches turns to..........

CLEGGY stuff

Fair comment.

Ok, let me get this straight; if I'm reading this right, you think that we can do without Trident and nuclear deterrents because the USA will come to our rescue? That is what you're saying? That because we are with them in the Oil War they will leap to our defence?

The scenario is this: we do away with Trident, North Korea or a.n. other goes apeshit and decides to bomb us as a show of strength, and the USA is our saviour?

I'm sorry but if that's what you believe then you clearly ARE looking at the world through rose tinted glasses! The USA wouldn't lift a finger unless it, too, is attacked.

Ok, it's very expensive, granted, but then keeping your country safe and protected is never going to be cheap.

I understand your reasoning that the money could be - in your eyes - better spent elsewhere, but that misses the point that if xyz party does scrap Trident they aren't going to spend that money - it will be an example of 'spending cuts' hailed to show how economical the new leaders are being.

I can only say I disagree with you in that it's great to have a country that we wish to strive to improve, but I'm happy to pay my bit to make it one that future generations can strive to improve with a reduced threat of being blasted from the face of the earth by some mad idiot.

We will have to agree on one thing and that is to dissagree.

Bye the way the Nuclear club consist of just 5 countries

USA,SOVIET UNION,FRANCE,CHINA,UK

There are another ONLY 3 other countries that have not signed up the non proliferation treaty they are INDIA,PAKISTAN,NORTH KOREA.....and ISRAEL will not confirm or deny that it has a nuclear capability.........

Now then I can see of only one country that just might have as you put it want to blast us "off the face of the earth"

The others well I dont consider them a threat to world peace...ie indiscrimanatly bomb peacefull nations..

So if your interpritation is correct the whole world with the exception of those named above are doomed I think not..........

No I STAND by what I say its a complete waste of money and your comments fully endorse my feelings but as I said earlier we will have to agree to dissagree...

We fortunatly live in a society where we can freely discuss these differences of opinion openly and its no thanks to having nuclear weapons.

As it clearly concerns you - being bombed, that is - surely you can see that having the ability to retaliate means you can, in fact, sleep easier?

I'm not sure that you're being consistent here; on the one hand you say you can see the arguments for having Trident, on the other you are convinced it's a waste of money. Granted, it's very pricey, as is anything designed to protect an entire nation, but surely the portion of our taxes that goes to the defence budget is something we should be happy to contribute to? I agree, it's of little use in Iraq and Afganistan but that's a moot point as, like you I suspect, I don't believe we should be there.

The point is this: there are mad tyrants in the world who are gaining in power - look to Korea, for example, for the first signs of instability - and who, like many have gone before, may well have delusions of world domination. It's always been like this - we are not, in any way, one big, happy family of nations all existing in the perfect harmony of an aged Blue Mink hit. Say one of those tyrants decides he fancies unleashing his firepower on a country that would show his might; if he knows they would simply wipe him out in a retaliatory attack, he's much, much less likely to do so. He'll choose someone who can't retaliate.

Get rid of Trident, and the resultant vulnerability you leave the county open to is worth far more to thers than the price we pay for a deterrent.

I said I could see the point what I DIDNT say was I AGREED with it.

and I don,t look at the state of the world through rose coloured glasses I,m not that naieve or in fact that blinkered either.... There are tyrants in the world with delusions of greatness "world domination" with all due respect is taking it a "bit to far" other than the USA lol and like I said they are on our side and I dont think for one second they will stand and do nothing in the event of a show of threat from whoever North Korea if you want. We are with them in the no win battle for OIL in the middle east where I believe a certain tyrant who had apparent WMD,s and was of GREAT threat to world safety once lived. And the history books in the long distant future may just tell the truth one day.

I do think however and I REPEAT it is a waste of money......... money that could be used to make this country a better place to live health, education, law and order the ecconomy JOBS etc etc who knows even Bedlington might get a slice of the action

Why are the SNP making such a fuss about the telly debate? when they have there own debate in scotland! why do i need to listen to that baffoon salmond! hes got nowt to do with england lets invite the DUP or plaid welsh lot to join in to!

They might be confused cos our PM is Scottish

Before we start messing with the voting system we have to get more than six out of ten people to vote.

Well it may be an incentive for folks to vote KNOWING its possible the party they feel more inclinded to vote for might get in.

As in the case around here where if Harold Shipman was standing for Labour he would get in as Mobius said on this forum a while back, consequentaly the way I see it there are 4 votes going to waste possibly.

You've answered your own original question there; we don't want to get bombed, and neither does anyone else, hence having an effective deterrent such as Trident means we are much less likely to. That's why we have it, and must continue to do so.

Oh well thats ok then I will sleep well in my bed knowing that NO ONE will EVER dare to bomb us .........

I still think its a waste of money .... money that could be spent elswhere on something more worthwhile other than you hit me and i,ll hit you back.

Would it be a good thing or a bad thing for the Country ?.. I mean we are supposed to live in a Democratic Country and surely if a party is voted in by a majority the majority will be happy or is our archaic system scared of change

I can see plenty of places where threats can and do come from its just I don't see any of the nuclear capability countries as being included which would seem to make the whole argument, if you let one off so will we, redundant. I wonder how soundly people who live in non nuclear armed counties sleep at night, probably better for not being a primary target!

As for stopping the military adventures, yes we should. I also think that in present circumstances we should stop this increase in foreign aid promised and put that £4B into paying some debt off.

Correct Charity begins at home god knows we need it

oh I see LOL ........Listen with ALL due respect to ALL who answered.. I CAN see the argument for having Trident however in the event we get BOMBED all we are going to do is get even with the country that has bombed us erm we will all be gonners.. So we are going to die with a we got you back smile on our face erm bit sad aint it because it would be the last thing on my mind and probably yours also.

And don,t forget we have the good old USA on our side its like having a BIG brother lol...........And our nuclear threat is doing us a power of good in Afganistan/Iraq and probably Iran soon........ I mean they are quacking in the sandels

May I ask a question " WHATS THE POINT OF HAVING TRIDENT " other than the fact that WE have spent/wasted billions on it I cannot see the point is it just so we can say if you bomb us we will bomb you and is it BIGGER than others may have mind you I do know in this country we are good at wasting money well the powers that be are

Not racist at all, no matter who it's asked by. How many unemployed? How many work for the civil service? How many use the X31 everyday? How many were born outside the UK?

How many would fight for this country if called upon?

My sincere condolences to his family and friends both on here and elswhere

Well it looks like the "establishment" are after the Liberals/Clegg theres been so much thrown at them this week its obvious he rattled the other two "leaders" last week so its time to throw a lot of muck and hope some of it sticks I,m still not convinced there is a leader among any of them mind

getting chased by wadie for pinching his snaggies! (chased by the local farmer for stealing swedes!) pops mobile shop and setting the woods on fire!

We pinched his snaggies and his tetties and his conkers from the trees next to the big house I wish I had a pound for everytime we got "chased".

This has to be a misunderstanding. Are they seriously saying that they can't find four streets from Hazelmere, Beaufront Park, Humford Way, Church Lane, Towers Close, Church Lane, the new bit of Bower Grange that aren't classed as disadvantaged (even if you don't count Nedderton, Hartford Bridge/Hall)?

These statistics are usually done by council ward anyway, and I wonder if she meant only four wards in Bedlingtonshire?

AYE and divint forget the Station theres some canny nice places doon there

no only less health and safety!

Lot to be said about that Mr Monsta mainly crap mind

I have on two occassions been on an aeroplane as it desended and landed in a sandstorm they wer,nt severe one,s mind, however it was sand and I would have thought as sand makes glass it would be no different to the stuff thats apparently up in our atmosphere

Well I saw 2 aeroplanes flying over Durham today heading west I must only assume they were military ? So have they got different engines ?

I,m not the most active on here but it is always interesting to read Mr.Rooney,s posts

so Get Well Soon

Cameron's notes

BRILL