Are we heading towards ww3
- Thread starter tacker
- Start date
I wonder how close to the front these European gob sh!tes and their families will be. Starmer will have to take the day off, no doubt, to oversee his son's homework. It's pathetic leadership that has got us into this situation and they are responsible for the lives lost in this slaughter. No more, please.
tony spencer
Colt
Trouble is we rely on the Yanks to push the button they control the launch system on Trident
mick
Sire
I was unaware of this and am surprised to hear of it. !
D
Deleted member 7256
Guest
The UK has full operational control over Trident , the PM is the only person who can authorize the launching
The US helps maintain the missiles and theyre made in the States
gerry
Mare
Yeah they did @Sean when the germans tried to play them and then got caught out them selfs.Think you're forgetting that Russia played a huge part in world war 2gerry not just the Yanks
And it looks very similar today with russia making deals and after what happened in world war two you could not trust russia to stick with it as they got let down by germany last time.
JennyK
Gelding
"In 2006, Parliament’s Select Committee on Defence presented a White Paper to Parliament containing a granular analysis of the Trident program ..... including "One way the USA could show its displeasure would be to cut off the technical support needed for the UK to continue to send Trident to sea.”
Why? Apparently because "a huge amount of key Trident technology — including the neutron generators, warheads, gas reservoirs, missile body shells, guidance systems, GPS, targeting software, gravitational information and navigation systems — is provided directly by Washington."
Why? Apparently because "a huge amount of key Trident technology — including the neutron generators, warheads, gas reservoirs, missile body shells, guidance systems, GPS, targeting software, gravitational information and navigation systems — is provided directly by Washington."
JennyK
Gelding
peteI think if you re-read our exchange re the US Department of Education in March, you'll have to agree that the situation is playing out quite differently from how you expected.
Judging by another part of your post, I think you may find this piece by Chuck Devore helpful.
CHUCK DEVORE: Trump moves fast to save LA from a 1992 repeat
Los Angeles riots erupt as mobs attack federal officers during ICE deportations, prompting Trump to deploy National Guard while California officials criticize the response
www.foxnews.com
ARAZI91
Mare
I love watching Foxnews opinion pieces synced up with the sound of "Duelling Banjos (Deliverance...1972)" in the background
I think if you re-read our exchange re the US Department of Education in March, you'll have to agree that the situation is playing out quite differently from how you expected.
Judging by another part of your post, I think you may find this piece by Chuck Devore helpful.
CHUCK DEVORE: Trump moves fast to save LA from a 1992 repeat
Los Angeles riots erupt as mobs attack federal officers during ICE deportations, prompting Trump to deploy National Guard while California officials criticize the response
Removes the shame and stain of Centuries of White Privilege for all of a good-old shit-kicking, foot-tapping 4 minutes
Try it
for kicks
Last edited:
Michael231
Gelding
If it does then nothing will be done online as the Russians will have taken that out with a couple of placed torpedoes on the ocean floor. That would bring the UK to a stand still no banks to get money out as they wouldn't know how much you have in your account cash if you can get any from any where would be king, and then your back to bartering for everything.
Just hope we can retaliate with something to stop their information reaching them and bugger them up.
Just hope we can retaliate with something to stop their information reaching them and bugger them up.
Leodis
Gelding
It will be chaos if the digital world collapses, but there is a backup plan:
## Do Banks Keep Offline Records?
<b>Yes, banks generally maintain offline records of customers and their bank accounts as a precautionary measure against digital failures.</b>
---
### Reasons for Offline Record Keeping
1. **Disaster Recovery**: In the event of natural disasters, cyberattacks, or system failures, offline records ensure continuity and allow banks to restore operations.
2. **Regulatory Compliance**: Financial institutions are often required by law to keep certain records for a specified period, which may include both digital and physical copies.
3. **Security**: Storing physical records reduces the risk of data breach associated with online systems.
4. **Customer Trust**: Having a backup system instills confidence in customers that their information is safe and secure.
---
### Types of Offline Records
- **Physical Documents**: Hard copies of account opening forms, contracts, transaction records, and identification verification.
- **Backup Systems**: Some banks may store data on non-digital mediums, such as tape drives or external hard drives kept in secure locations.
### Conclusion
While the digital infrastructure is crucial for modern banking, maintaining offline records provides a necessary safety net. This helps banks to function effectively, even in the case of a digital crisis.
## Do Banks Keep Offline Records?
<b>Yes, banks generally maintain offline records of customers and their bank accounts as a precautionary measure against digital failures.</b>
---
### Reasons for Offline Record Keeping
1. **Disaster Recovery**: In the event of natural disasters, cyberattacks, or system failures, offline records ensure continuity and allow banks to restore operations.
2. **Regulatory Compliance**: Financial institutions are often required by law to keep certain records for a specified period, which may include both digital and physical copies.
3. **Security**: Storing physical records reduces the risk of data breach associated with online systems.
4. **Customer Trust**: Having a backup system instills confidence in customers that their information is safe and secure.
---
### Types of Offline Records
- **Physical Documents**: Hard copies of account opening forms, contracts, transaction records, and identification verification.
- **Backup Systems**: Some banks may store data on non-digital mediums, such as tape drives or external hard drives kept in secure locations.
### Conclusion
While the digital infrastructure is crucial for modern banking, maintaining offline records provides a necessary safety net. This helps banks to function effectively, even in the case of a digital crisis.
JennyK
Gelding
In short,
Leodis, the banks behave just like any prudent individual, use technology as much as one can but never have all your eggs in one basket, and for some things paper copies are important to keep.
WW3? The increasing number of European countries proposing some form of "voluntary" military service concerns me and I wonder how long before Starmer dusts off Sunak's last election proposal on those lines? So one could say that the likes of France and Germany are getting themselves better prepared for war. But war won't happen while President Trump is engaged in trying to find a compromise between Russia and Ukraine.
The problem is that for most of the time since WW2, western and now increasingly central and eastern European countries have been committed to what is often referred to as a rules based world. But Russia (and numerous other countries of which Iran and China are the most significant) haven't. We say "Russia can't rewarded for its aggression"; absolutely right from a rules based world view. The Russians, not being committed to that view, see it differently.
For all his narcissism and need to be thought right all the time about everything, one of President Trump's virtues is that he understands Putin's point of view, and that ultimately Russia will take control of as much of Ukraine as it wants, unless the US stops it. And the last thing President Trump and probably most Americans want is involvement in another major war. Hence President Trump is trying to broker the best deal he can achieve and knows that de facto if not de jure Putin won't settle for anything short of some territorial gain and a guarantee that Ukraine will not join NATO. Against the rules based world view that goes against the grain, rewarding Russia's aggression. But if the Ukrainians and "Europe" don't accept that, distasteful as it is to those of us who support the idea of a rules based world, sooner or later President Trump will disengage. If then "Europe", meaning in this context principally the current British and French leaders, provide Ukraine with long-range missiles that can hit Moscow, another European war seems to me to be a distinct possibility.
Leodis, the banks behave just like any prudent individual, use technology as much as one can but never have all your eggs in one basket, and for some things paper copies are important to keep.WW3? The increasing number of European countries proposing some form of "voluntary" military service concerns me and I wonder how long before Starmer dusts off Sunak's last election proposal on those lines? So one could say that the likes of France and Germany are getting themselves better prepared for war. But war won't happen while President Trump is engaged in trying to find a compromise between Russia and Ukraine.
The problem is that for most of the time since WW2, western and now increasingly central and eastern European countries have been committed to what is often referred to as a rules based world. But Russia (and numerous other countries of which Iran and China are the most significant) haven't. We say "Russia can't rewarded for its aggression"; absolutely right from a rules based world view. The Russians, not being committed to that view, see it differently.
For all his narcissism and need to be thought right all the time about everything, one of President Trump's virtues is that he understands Putin's point of view, and that ultimately Russia will take control of as much of Ukraine as it wants, unless the US stops it. And the last thing President Trump and probably most Americans want is involvement in another major war. Hence President Trump is trying to broker the best deal he can achieve and knows that de facto if not de jure Putin won't settle for anything short of some territorial gain and a guarantee that Ukraine will not join NATO. Against the rules based world view that goes against the grain, rewarding Russia's aggression. But if the Ukrainians and "Europe" don't accept that, distasteful as it is to those of us who support the idea of a rules based world, sooner or later President Trump will disengage. If then "Europe", meaning in this context principally the current British and French leaders, provide Ukraine with long-range missiles that can hit Moscow, another European war seems to me to be a distinct possibility.
Yes the mighty America lost virtually every war they have been in , the list of tiny backward nations or even parts of nations who have forced them away with their tail between their legs is endless.
Nonsense O Outlander , if American chooses to win a war against lesser powers then they will win, the conflicts you’re referring to had them fighting with their hands tied, all russia has behind them is the threat of ending the world. Russia can’t overcome ukraine after about 4 years, no match for for the might of the USA.
JennyK
Gelding
"If trump was a normal person America could stand strong and putin would come to heel."
What would, specifically, "stand strong" mean?
Did Obama "stand strong" over Syria, Biden over Russia/Ukraine (or indeed anything)? JFK certainly did over Cuba and the missiles but he was the exception and that, unlike Syria and Ukraine Cuba was in the US's back yard
Putin doesn't care much how many Russians get killed and any sign of dissent about the invasion of Ukraine goes nowhere. The US and western democracies are different. If "stand strong" means dead US soldiers coming back in body bags, one only has to remember the demonstrations against the war in Vietnam and the demise of LBJ. Similar responses certain in the UK, France, Germany etc if they suffer losses. One dead paratrooper, killed in an accident, makes the BBC news today.
What would, specifically, "stand strong" mean?
Did Obama "stand strong" over Syria, Biden over Russia/Ukraine (or indeed anything)? JFK certainly did over Cuba and the missiles but he was the exception and that, unlike Syria and Ukraine Cuba was in the US's back yard
Putin doesn't care much how many Russians get killed and any sign of dissent about the invasion of Ukraine goes nowhere. The US and western democracies are different. If "stand strong" means dead US soldiers coming back in body bags, one only has to remember the demonstrations against the war in Vietnam and the demise of LBJ. Similar responses certain in the UK, France, Germany etc if they suffer losses. One dead paratrooper, killed in an accident, makes the BBC news today.
I just read the form T tacker, they lost to Korea, Cuba, North Vietnam, Khmer Rouge , Somalia and the Taliban, and before that were spanked by the Brits, don’t fancy them much against Russia. They are rank useless unless they drop a nuke.