Home

TheSinner.net

General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

This message board is for discussing anything in any way remotely connected with St Andrews, the University or just anything you want. Welcome!

Who will (or would) you vote for on 6 May?

Poll ended at Wed May 05, 2010 11:25 pm

British National Party
6
4%
Conservative Party
23
17%
Green Party
4
3%
Independent candidate (including Jury Team)
0
No votes
Labour Party
15
11%
Liberal Democrat Party
44
32%
Plaid Cymru
0
No votes
Scottish National Party
43
31%
Socialist party (any)
0
No votes
UK Independence Party
1
1%
Other
2
1%
 
Total votes : 138

General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby David Bean on Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:25 pm

I thought it might be fun to have a Sinner poll to see which parties enjoy the most support from this little community of ours. To make it as participative as possible, if you aren't entitled to vote in the UK, aren't old enough or aren't registered (for shame!), please feel free to vote here anyway for the party you would vote for if you had the opportunity - but in that case it'd be helpful if you posted a message on the thread saying who you voted for, so that we could get some idea of the results for registered voters only. Apologies if your party isn't listed; I wanted to include as many as possible, but the poll facility allows a maximum of ten options. I wanted to include a 'won't vote' option, but unfortunately I don't think I can reasonably bump any of the current options in its favour.

Discussion is very much encouraged, although for all our sakes I'd be obliged if people could keep it positive. Subjects of interest would include: why you're voting that way, which constituency you'll be voting in and what you make of your local candidates, which party you're voting for if you've selected 'other', and how you'll be voting in the local council elections in England if you're voting there.

Lastly, in the interests of fairness I've listed the parties in alphabetical order, with the exception of Others.
Psalm 91:7
David Bean
 
Posts: 3053
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby David Bean on Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:29 pm

On my own account, I'm voting Conservative, which isn't especially surprising as I'm a local government candidate and a member of its National Convention, but specifically to this election I really do feel that the Conservatives are the party to bring the change we need in this country, to strengthen our broken economy, mend our broken society and fix our broken politics. But enough from me! :)
Psalm 91:7
David Bean
 
Posts: 3053
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby Jormungand on Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:59 pm

Unless I'm mistaken, you've not included the Labour Party in your poll.

My home constituency is Pudsey, which Labour has held since 1997. Prior to that, it had been Conservative since 1928.

I'm registered in North East Fife, and plan to vote Labour. This is a safe seat for the LibDems; my hope is that while my vote can make no difference to the strict outcome, it could make a difference as far as the moral case for forming a Lib-Lab Coalition in the case of a hung parliament. A tiny difference, but a difference nonetheless.

On my own account, I'm voting Conservative, which isn't especially surprising as I'm a local government candidate and a member of its National Convention, but specifically to this election I really do feel that the Conservatives are the party to bring the change we need in this country, to strengthen our broken economy, mend our broken society and fix our broken politics. But enough from me! :)

How can we expect the Conservatives to 'clean up politics' when their leader is a career politician, that contemptible type who consider their own personal acquisition more important than public service?
President of WarSoc
2nd Year MA History
Jormungand
User avatar
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:54 pm
Location: St Andrews in term-time, Leeds otherwise

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby RedCelt69 on Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:44 am

David Bean wrote:Discussion is very much encouraged, although for all our sakes I'd be obliged if people could keep it positive.

Again, someone on the internet telling others what is and isn't acceptable on the internet. Discussion is very much encouraged on a discussion board? Fancy that.

And fancy a Tory excluding Labour from the actual polling list. I mean, their chances of winning the majority of seats is questionable (to say the very least) but it isn't a very good reason for excluding them altogether. They'll certainly end up with more seats than the BNP.

David Bean wrote:I'm voting Conservative, which isn't especially surprising

Sad man votes for sad party. Not even remotely surprising, no.

David Bean wrote:the Conservatives are the party to bring the change we need in this country, to strengthen our broken economy, mend our broken society and fix our broken politics.

I read those words and all I can hear is Cameron's voice. Is that a direct quote?

The Cameronian Conservatives are as much of a joke as the Hague Conservatives and the Duncan Smith Conservatives… with an airbrushed leader with airbrushed "ideas". The only reason he is so close to Number 10 (and you can read the words "I belong there, the plebs will vote me in" in his face) is that Brownian Labour is so terribly, terribly unpopular.

Clegg pops onto the screens and got so much attention from the public because the emptiness of the Tory "plans" for the future aren't the only desperate non-Brown option on the table any more. Cameron had been clamouring for an on-screen debate for ages. It was a hideously bad idea and, that hideously bad idea might just be bad enough to stop him getting into power and making shitloads more bad ideas.

Cameron is a joke. If you don't realise it, then so are you.

How was that for positivity? ^.^

My vote would be for a hung (balanced) parliament. It looks like Westminster's recent follies might finally lead to the death knell of the 2-horse FPTP system and lead the way to full PR... when there actually wouldn't be any more wasted votes, which (along with many other reasons) has left the UK with such appalling turnouts in recent elections.
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and celt
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed

Red Celt's Blog
RedCelt69
User avatar
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby wild_quinine on Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:13 am

I'm all tired out of tactical voting, and that goes double for the endless comedy justifications of such. This year I'm voting for the least crazy party whose politics most directly accord with my own. Fuck the end game.

And I won't say anything else that isn't positive. Nothing to see here.

Spoiler: show
I'll say this, though: I've never liked New Labour. They've been a bunch of shitty second rate Conservatives.

Worshipping big business just to be with the big boys. Eating Civil Liberties like a mischief of monkeys with the last bananas on earth. Bringing back the zombie corpses of people who've been sacked - what? sixteen, seventeen times, or some shit. Oh, and the sleaze. When the Conservatives were ousted in the 90's, a lot of it was on the back of the sleaze. How tame it looks now! David Mellor got his toes sucked, and a whole party was shamed? Meet John Prescott who bangs his Secretary in the office, and it's hardly even news because of all the other fucked up shit going on.

When New Labour came into power, I was about to go to Uni. I took a year to improve myself, and when I came back they'd cancelled the fucking grants and introduced student loans and tuition fees. Did them both in a double-whammy, I reckon, cause they knew the NUS would only have the stones to protest one thing at a time. (They also put the welly into the elderly and the disabled at about the same time.) All the while going on about how education here was still so much better off than America which, by that time, was hardly even true - and furthermore irrelevant since Americans know they need a College fund. My parents didn't save for a college fund and as such I'll be paying off student loans like another mortgage until I'm forty-shit years old. Nice that the interest on them is 5% at the moment.

But the thing that offends me most about New fucking Labour is how wibbly-wobbly, knocky-knees, pissy-knickers terrified they've been of fucking everything. My old man is about the meekest human being you will ever meet, wouldn't break a fly's leg if it were trapped in a spiderweb, and he broke the law for just about the first time I'm aware of in his life when he asked the local butcher if he had 'Anything special under the counter?' Why? Because a petrified Labour government had made T-bone steaks illegal. Start as you mean to go on: the event that stands out for me most from all the ministerial expensives bullshit was Barbara Follet, who got mugged and then spent 25K of our money on personal security expenses, because she was scared. That sums up all of New Labour's reign, for me. Great solution, Follet. What about the rest of us that get mugged?

Fucking New Labour. What a total bunch of cunts.
Last edited by wild_quinine on Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
wild_quinine
User avatar
 
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 11:57 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby RedCelt69 on Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:29 am

wild_quinine wrote:Fucking New Labour. What a total bunch of cunts.

Without Googling the exact number, I believe that the number of new offences introduced since 1997 is around the 3,600 mark.

But you would also have to inquire as to how many of those were opposed by the Tories. The nanny-state mentality isn't solely down to Labour. It's a National mindset that goes much broader than that. The whole "I can't do that, because Health & Safety would hassle me" was in place long before 1997. It's gotten worse, but you need to look at the wider picture than just one, clapped-out political party.

And remind yourself that Cameron sees himself as the new Tony Blair... self-personification above policies... grabbing recurring soundbites from an unhappy public in an effort to gain power.

Love it or loathe it, New Labour was actually new... middle-ground policies with a smidgen of left-leaning rhetoric to keep the lefties reasonably un-miserable about the changed party. New Tory is identical to the original - with a poster boy pretending to be something else entirely. When the public are around.
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and celt
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed

Red Celt's Blog
RedCelt69
User avatar
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby wild_quinine on Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:39 am

I have spoilered out the text of my previous entry, to keep things 'positive', and avoid causing David Bean any undue suffering. Pretend there's nothing more to it, David. :P

RedCelt69 wrote:It's gotten worse, but you need to look at the wider picture than just one, clapped-out political party.


I know. Politics, eh?

Love it or loathe it, New Labour was actually new (middle-ground policies with a smidgen of left-leaning rhetoric to keep the lefties reasonably un-miserable about the changed party. New Tory is identical to the original - with a poster boy pretending to be something else entirely.


Labour shot further right than you credit them, whilst still pretending to be all things to all men. Sadly, they were shit at it. At least the Conservatives could pull off the old fat-cat chic. Labour just spent a decade looking like the fat kid trying to be friends with the popular crowd. I still couldn't bring myself to vote Conservative, but it took New Labour to make me appreciate their refinement. They really do have a higher class of greedy self-serving bastard.

Fuck them, too, though. As you rightly point out - where have they been for the last painful 13 years?
wild_quinine
User avatar
 
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 11:57 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby RedCelt69 on Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:56 am

Every vote I've ever cast has been for Labour. I was reticent about voting for Tony Blair for the first time. Mainly because I'd been following his political career since he first got his smirking self-congratulatory smile onto TV... and I was still mourning the loss of John Smith - who, I think, would have made a great post-Major PM.

Despite Blair, I'd hoped that the party, as a whole, wouldn't be so subsumed under one man's control as it ended up being. Brown is a political also-ran who manouvered himself into number 10. The public didn't vote him in, and there's a good chance that his time as PM will come to an end having never gotten the political mandate that such a position requires.

More recently, I've just stopped voting. I would not and could not vote for a party whose leader supported the invasion of Iraq. Blair (obviously) did. Brown gave his full support. After May 6th, I'll take a look at Labour's (eventual) new leader. Just for the sake of wondering if I could vote Labour at any point in the near future.

If I was still casting my vote in England, I'd be voting for Lib Dem... who firmly and consistently opposed the illegal invasion of Iraq. But it would be a wasted vote, as my former home-territory is a Tory safe-seat. If only we had something like PR...
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and celt
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed

Red Celt's Blog
RedCelt69
User avatar
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby DACrowe on Wed Apr 28, 2010 2:43 am

And here's me thinking I'd play nice and not mention either the student elections or the General Election on the sinner.

I'm voting Liberal Democrat and so should you. Why? The short answer is (a) you ought to vote, (b) you shouldn't vote for the Conservatives unless you are (b1) immensely wealthy and (b2) hate most other people for some reason, (c) you shouldn't vote for Labour because though they have had some positive accomplishments to point to their addiction to bureaucracy, their lack of economic imagination, their apparent contempt for civil liberties and parliamentary democracy, their authoritarian approach to social policy, their lamentable foreign policy record and their inaction (sunk cost fallacy?) on the reforms which need to be made make them unsupportable, (c) you shouldn't vote for the SNP because (c1) their manifesto for Westminster is an embarrassment, including things they couldn't even hope to deliver (the London Olympics as a Barnett consequential? Who are you kidding?) (c2) they've shown themselves consistent incapable or unwilling to deliver on almost all their Holyrood manifesto pledges and (c3) independence remains a dubious prospect for Scotland and (c4) in practice SNP MPs tend to vote with the Tories most of the time (more often than David Mundell), (d) The Liberal Democrats (d1) have been calling for, voting for and bringing bills forward on expenses reform, party donor reform, electoral reform, recall elections, parliamentary transparency and Lords reform for years upon years upon years and this chance we finally have a chance to get some of it done after the recent scandals have woken the public up to the corruption in the present system, (d2) they are committed to restoring and protecting our civil liberties and getting rid of the more pointless parts of the bureaucracy (ID cards, NHS overmanagement, police redtape); the downsides of Labour, (d3) they have plans to tackle the deficit which are plausible and non-punitive (I could just say '(d3) Vince Cable'), (d4) they are progressive and economically liberal on trade, education reform (in England), taxation, unemployment and immigration, (d5) they've been consistently correct on foreign policy during Labour's period in Office and have a much more plausible claim as leading figures in the European Liberals of being taken serious in Europe (contra the Tories), (d6) they are considered by Friends of the Earth to be the most green party and (IMO, YMMV) are 100% correct on energy policy, (d7) they've actually set out in full exactly what their plans are along with conservative estimates of how much they will gain in savings and taxation and how much their policies. Labour and the Tories manifestos are comparatively and the SNP manifesto is, frankly, a joke.

I'll be giving the long answer on STAR radio next Monday from around 5pm.

@RedCelt - I know he's got a sizeable majority, but Ming Campbell would still appreciate your vote anyway if you're registered here.
DACrowe
 
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby DACrowe on Wed Apr 28, 2010 2:55 am

wild_quinine wrote:Labour shot further right than you credit them, whilst still pretending to be all things to all men.


I don't think they actually have. Gone all the way to the right, I mean. They're obviously to the right of where they were under foot, but New Labour doesn't really have an ideology. It has a large number of people who believe themselves to be left wing but either (a) were so broken by the experience of opposition under the Conservatives they were willing to do whatever anyone told them to do to stay electable* or (b) came in either with or after Blair and looked to their seniors for 'guidance'. The result being a parliament full of people without clear reason for voting the way they do but convinced that whatever they do it must have been in the right.

The party platform (as practiced) was a mix of:
1) traditional, long-term Labour policies such as the minimum wage, increased public sector spending and Scottish devolution,
2) social authoritarian policies stolen from the Tories (especially as regards crime),
3) Brown's economic policies; a blend of public-private partnerships, welfare micromanagement through tax credits and use of public sector jobs as a form of intervention,
4) Blair's rather odd (neo-conservative?) foreign policy
5) Random odds and sods chosen because they test well with focus groups.

Now that's not the basis for an ideology. With Labour of the 70s or the LibDem or the Tories you can say 'hang on, that's not consistent with what you claim to value as a party'. You weren't ever in a position to do that with New Labour. As regards left/right (1) is left wing, (2) is right wing, (3) is a mixed bag, (4) is arguably right though the writers of the Euston Manifesto might disagree and (5) is just plain old populism. Right-ish but more like an incoherent jumble, really.

*Honourable exceptions of course; Robin Cook, Clare Short.
DACrowe
 
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby Delts on Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:02 am

I'm voting Lib Dem. They're the party who I hate the least so they get my vote. I do hope it's a balanced parliament though, and as Red Celt said, it will hopefully get PR in rather than the ridiculous system we have now.

Why I hate the other parties more:

New Labour are a bunch of twats who cave to peer pressure from various businesses and America and think they have to protect ourselves from ourselves, and would quite like to be able to justify every paranoid delusion.

Conservatives. Their name says it all for me.

And the others in the order they were in the poll:

BNP are just a joke. Openly racist and wouldn't have a clue what to do if real power were handed to them, other than block the borders off.

Green Party I detest over their fear of the word nuclear and their opposition to any new nuclear power stations.

I've not heard of/seen any campaign for an independent candidate in my constituency.

Plaid Cymru, I'm not Welsh.

SNP, I voted for them during the Scottish elections, but I've been disappointed with their performance in Holyrood, and Alex Salmond appears to be getting crazier by the day. Also I feel that it's completely pointless to vote for them in the general election where they would have as much influence as a match during an atomic test.

Socialist, I hate socialist ideology, and most socialist parties still follow their ideology.

UKIP are for people who want to vote BNP but can't admit that they are racist.
If you do physics, panic.
Delts
 
Posts: 481
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 1:35 am
Location: Miles away, literally

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby Delts on Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:03 am

I'm voting Lib Dem. They're the party who I hate the least so they get my vote. I do hope it's a balanced parliament though, and as Red Celt said, it will hopefully get PR in rather than the ridiculous system we have now.

Why I hate the other parties more:

New Labour are a bunch of twats who cave to peer pressure from various businesses and America and think they have to protect ourselves from ourselves, and would quite like to be able to justify every paranoid delusion.

Conservatives. Their name says it all for me.

And the others in the order they were in the poll:

BNP are just a joke. Openly racist and wouldn't have a clue what to do if real power were handed to them, other than block the borders off.

Green Party I detest over their fear of the word nuclear and their opposition to any new nuclear power stations.

I've not heard of/seen any campaign for an independent candidate in my constituency.

Plaid Cymru, I'm not Welsh.

SNP, I voted for them during the Scottish elections, but I've been disappointed with their performance in Holyrood, and Alex Salmond appears to be getting crazier by the day. Also I feel that it's completely pointless to vote for them in the general election where they would have as much influence as a match during an atomic test.

Socialist, I hate socialist ideology, and most socialist parties still follow their ideology.

UKIP are for people who want to vote BNP but can't admit that they are racist.
If you do physics, panic.
Delts
 
Posts: 481
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 1:35 am
Location: Miles away, literally

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby Power Metal Dom on Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:55 am

I'm voting Lib Dems. I had been all for voting Tory since I last voted but I remain utterly unconvinced that they'll bring the 'change' they're bleating about. 13 years of Labour rule have been disastrous, any vote for them leaves me baffled. I agree with some policies from all of them especially Lib Dems and Tories so it's tough but when it comes down to it though really you're just trying to choose the lesser of 3 evils who're likely to get the most votes. Tactical voting aside and for engaging with the spirit of democracy, I'd like to vote Green, Pirate Party or Science Party but I know they'd be a 'wasted' vote.
Aren't you all entitled to your half-arsed musings...You've thought about eternity for 25 minutes and think you've come to some interesting conclusions...My kind have harvested the souls of a million peasants and I couldn't give a ha'penny jizz for your internet assembled philosophy
Power Metal Dom
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:27 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby Fawksie on Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:08 pm

Sorry David, I have raised the poll options limit, and added Labour since it was the most obvious omission. Feel free to add any others that you had cut.

Votes can be changed if you previously selected Other and your preferred choice now appears...
The fox is a crafty and deceitful animal that never runs in a straight line, but only in circles.
Fawksie
Administrator

User avatar
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:32 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby RedCelt69 on Wed Apr 28, 2010 2:36 pm

Delts wrote:Green Party I detest over their fear of the word nuclear and their opposition to any new nuclear power stations.

That's one reason for you to detest the Greens, however you gave another (stronger) reason afterwards...
Delts wrote:Socialist, I hate socialist ideology, and most socialist parties still follow their ideology.

Their environmental policies aside, the Green Party are one of the most socialist parties around. And have been for years. Anyone who is centrist-to-right should take a closer look at the Green Party, as they might be a tad disturbed at what they're casting their vote for.
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and celt
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed

Red Celt's Blog
RedCelt69
User avatar
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby Haunted on Wed Apr 28, 2010 2:38 pm

Tell me oh mighty Cameron, who have you been speaking to this week?
http://www.fridgemagnet.org.uk/toys/dave-met.php
Genesis 19:4-8
Haunted
User avatar
 
Posts: 3171
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:05 am

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby jequirity on Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:09 pm

I've been impressed by the Lib Dems lately but their pledge to find a low cost replacement for Trident and dropping tranche 3 of the Eurofighter is a deal breaker for me. There's bugger all effective low cost replacement for Trident and getting out of tranche 3 won't be worth it in the long run :roll: . I'm not a big fan of their views on nuclear energy either.

Having said that, with all the rest of the parties there are associated deal-breaking policies for me, there's not one party i'd happily support right now.
jequirity
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 10:49 am

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby RedCelt69 on Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:33 pm

jequirity wrote:I've been impressed by the Lib Dems lately but their pledge to find a low cost replacement for Trident and dropping tranche 3 of the Eurofighter is a deal breaker for me. There's bugger all effective low cost replacement for Trident and getting out of tranche 3 won't be worth it in the long run :roll: . I'm not a big fan of their views on nuclear energy either.

My understanding of their policy in Trident (based on lots of interviews with the Lib Dems) is this...

It isn't that they have a magical solution for a cheaper replacement to Trident. Nor are they CND-like in their desire to rid the world of nuclear weapons altogether.

The point they've been making is that the current nuclear system doesn't need to be replaced immediately. There's some shelf-life in the old dears, still. Their point is that the system we have in place is based on a Cold War (anti-Soviet) deterrent... a deterrent which can not and should not be replaced on a like-for-like basis. Especially when the cost of doing so is prohibitively expensive.

The Lib Dems want the nuclear situation evaluated alongside the rest of the UK's military systems, rather than from the nod of a PM whose military involvement has been a smidgen less than exemplary.

What the end result will be (on the basis of military advisement) will be carried out, depending upon what the UK's needs are deemed to be. If that includes a like-for-like Cold War replacement in a non Cold War environment, then that's what will have to happen.

What's much more likely is a nominal deterrent using less manpower and fewer submarines (dropping the existing always-one-at-sea policy that's currently in place). Such differences won't save a few pennies. They will save a few billion pounds. In this economic climate, such moves sound like a damned good idea... and is an idea that should be made at the right time by the right people.

Which is (afaik) the Lib Dem position.
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and celt
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed

Red Celt's Blog
RedCelt69
User avatar
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby Delts on Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:40 pm

RedCelt69 wrote:
Delts wrote:Green Party I detest over their fear of the word nuclear and their opposition to any new nuclear power stations.

That's one reason for you to detest the Greens, however you gave another (stronger) reason afterwards...
Delts wrote:Socialist, I hate socialist ideology, and most socialist parties still follow their ideology.

Their environmental policies aside, the Green Party are one of the most socialist parties around. And have been for years. Anyone who is centrist-to-right should take a closer look at the Green Party, as they might be a tad disturbed at what they're casting their vote for.


I honestly didn't look any further at the green party once I saw their absolute opposition to any form of nuclear energy. Whilst I understand concerns about fission I am a big fan of fusion research so the greens refusal to talk about it is a big no for me. It doesn't really surprise me though that they would have socialist rhetoric, the two beliefs often go hand in hand (green/socialism)
If you do physics, panic.
Delts
 
Posts: 481
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 1:35 am
Location: Miles away, literally

Re: General election 2010 - who will (or would) you vote for?

Postby jequirity on Wed Apr 28, 2010 4:09 pm

Unfortunately dropping one sub out of four decreases deterrance to an unacceptable level. Four subs is the bare minimum. The fact that one of the four subs is going to have to be taken out of service by 2020 means that the decision to replace the Trident set-up has to be taken very quickly. The replacement is for not just the missiles but the subs too.

The Trident system, although designed in the Cold War is still the most effective single method of deterrance today. It has the range and mobility to hit any point on the globe and is very unlikely to be detected. It doesn't really matter that it's a Cold War piece of kit to be honest, most of the hardware employed post-Cold War has been Cold-War era designed and has functioned suitably well. "Cold War" seems to be a byword used by the press for "obsolete" but it is anything but (but thats for another argument methinks).

The alternative systems are:
Cruise missiles with nuclear warheads - either submarine launched or aeroplane launched
ICBM style missiles.

The problem with the cruise missile system is that the range offered is decreased and the missiles can be intercepted far more easily than trident. Air-launch also brings an increased vunerability to the equation due to the introduction of aircraft. ICBM missiles have the range but are based in silos, once located, can be taken out swiftly.

Quite frankly, there is no cheaper replacement that is as effective as Trident, military speaking that is. Trident needs to be replaced in ~ 10 years time which means decisions have to be made now to ensure deterrence is uninterupted.

That is if we need to have a nuclear deterrant at all. If the Lib Dems concentrated on whether we need a deterrant or not i'd be more inclined to listen to them, however they're giving the impression that they are trying to find a low cost, less effective system to try to please everyone, that neither satisfies those that are against nuclear weapons and those that feel that they are necessary.
Last edited by jequirity on Wed Apr 28, 2010 5:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
jequirity
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 10:49 am

Next

Return to The Sinner's Main Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests

cron