UK General Election 2017

[Idaho]

Aneurin Bevan on unilateral nuclear disarmament.

Post ww2 was a different world. I don't agree his comments are germane now.

[Montmorency]

Post ww2 was a different world. I don't agree his comments are germane now.

The modern Chinese arsenal puts paid to contemporary hopes of disarmament. Any attempts to revive US-Russian bilateral efforts are trivialized by its existence.

I agree that MAD is outdated: nowadays, a single offensive nuclear discharge could be expected to provoke no more than proportionate retaliation, while also potentially achieving all conventional military and political objectives in the act.

Argument from authority. Rhetorical fallacy.

What did he argue from authority?

[Pannonian]

The modern Chinese arsenal puts paid to contemporary hopes of disarmament. Any attempts to revive US-Russian bilateral efforts are trivialized by its existence.

I agree that MAD is outdated: nowadays, a single offensive nuclear discharge could be expected to provoke no more than proportionate retaliation, while also potentially achieving all conventional military and political objectives in the act.

What did he argue from authority?

He got on his high horse about how he's properly representative of the left and how I'm on the slide towards the far right, then I posted a quote from one of the icons of the Labour party that argued the opposite of his position. He's previous also used the same dismissal (argument from authority) to dismiss accounts from former shadow cabinet ministers of Corbyn's incompetence. It's his method of dismissing any and all evidence that might make his beloved leader look bad.

Expert opinions on Corbyn's leadership
Lilian Greenwood, former shadow cabinet minister
Thangam Debbonaire, former shadow cabinet minister
Richard Murphy, Corbyn's former chief economics adviser
David Blanchflower, member of Labour's Economic Advisory Committee
Angela Smith, Labour's leader in the House of Lords

I haven't posted the last one yet, so here's an excerpt.

This is called argument from authority. Usually a favourite rhetorical fallacy of American gun nuts and anti abortionists.

Remember kids, when teachers mark you down for being wrong, refute them with "This is called argument from authority. Usually a favourite rhetorical fallacy of American gun nuts and anti abortionists."

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Why should we have Nuclear Weapons?

Because otherwise we will be sheltering under America's Nuclear Shield, which means we really will be an American vassal - unless you prefer being a French vassal.

We will also be subservient to Israel, Pakistan, India, France, China and Russia in all military matters, as well as the US.

Nuclear weapons are things we have, not things we use. This is why their maintenance has traditionally been separate from the defence budget, they are weapons of diplomacy - not war.

It is, in fact, possible that within out lifetimes these weapons will be made obsolete by anti-missile shields, and then we can consider getting rid of them - not before.

[Brenus]

unless you prefer being a French vassal.

Well, you were once, can't say it would be a completely new and unknown situation...

[Tristuskhan]

Because otherwise we will be sheltering under America's Nuclear Shield, which means we really will be an American vassal - unless you prefer being a French vassal.

A French Vassal like Germany, Spain, Italy and so many smaller servants? Or maybe France doesn't ask for any oath of submission since she alone funds her nuclear strike force. And then we'll take Jersey back from the Crown.

Nuclear weapons are things we have, not things we use. This is why their maintenance has traditionally been separate from the defence budget, they are weapons of diplomacy - not war.

Is it formally so? French nukes are funded on defense budget.

[Idaho]

The modern Chinese arsenal puts paid to contemporary hopes of disarmament. Any attempts to revive US-Russian bilateral efforts are trivialized by its existence.

I agree that MAD is outdated: nowadays, a single offensive nuclear discharge could be expected to provoke no more than proportionate retaliation, while also potentially achieving all conventional military and political objectives in the act.



What did he argue from authority?

He stated that Nye Bevan was against unilateral disarmament, therefore it's wrong.

[Montmorency]

He stated that Nye Bevan was against unilateral disarmament, therefore it's wrong.

Or, he's presenting a statement from a politician which he agrees with - Jeremy Corbyn being another leading politician, and so in a position of authority, though one with whom Pannonian disagrees.

You'd be closer to something if you could get Pannonian to say that this fellow's case is worth more than Corbyn's on the basis of Corbyn being a lesser politician.

[Pannonian]

Or, he's presenting a statement from a politician which he agrees with - Jeremy Corbyn being another leading politician, and so in a position of authority, though one with whom Pannonian disagrees.

You'd be closer to something if you could get Pannonian to say that this fellow's case is worth more than Corbyn's on the basis of Corbyn being a lesser politician.

I'll happily say that and more. I'm principally concerned with domestic matters, how to make Britain better. I like those politicians like Bevan and Cooper who have substantially contributed to this (and Cooper, significant though her contribution is, isn't a patch on Bevan). They have rather more of my ear than someone like Corbyn who has done nothing except go on protest marches and rallies throughout his life.

What has Corbyn ever done to make Britain a better place, compared with someone like Cooper? What does his CV consist of, that we should attach any kind of weight to his views, especially where they clash with the mainstream?

[LittleGrizzly]

TBH I think we have too many excitable red blooded males in the country for Trident to be scrapped anytime soon, as shown by the entertaining questions completely removed from reality on QT about responding to an Iranian or N. Korean attack....

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

TBH I think we have too many excitable red blooded males in the country for Trident to be scrapped anytime soon, as shown by the entertaining questions completely removed from reality on QT about responding to an Iranian or N. Korean attack....

Those people don't want Corbyn to use Nuclear Weapons, they just want to know he won't upset the global strategic status quo.

That's how important Trident is, it's a question of global political significance and people want to know Corbyn is going to make political decisions divorced of any personal ideology.