U.K. Depends On U.S. Military

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

I agree....to a point. I don't think one on one the English army is any better or worse than ours.

The English army is a great ally and a great fighting force.

It's just too bad they come from England apparently as I am starting to not think the same of them.Actually a large proportion of them seem to hail from Scotland.

It's the British Army,actually. :p

It's the British Army,actually. :p
yes, the Army is British but the Scots fight on the front line of action in the British army.

Can you tell us a single fact about the Kyoto treaty?

It requires countries like America to reduce ozone emissions FAR more dramatically than any other country in the world. At face level...that would seem right if we pollute more.

However....it also allows for undeveloped countries.....and countries like China....to continually increase the pace of pollution up to the same level as the US.

So essentially what the Kyoto treaty is.....is a redistribution of the pollution....they want us to curb our manufacturing and emissions while allowing other countries to take what we reduce.

You need to get your head out of your own ass and actually know something about the treaty before casting aspersions.you're right, it does restict co2 emissions from the US, being the biggest polluter but 3rd world countries appear to get off lightly. Of course by thinking of yourselves all the time you have missed the fact that Kyoto is designed to reduce WORLD emissions. We start by killing the major criminals (USA). If we want to produce a robust manufacturing industry with very low emissions we will have to spend a lot of time and money on alternatives to current prodecures. The USA has the money, it is the biggest polluter. You put two and two together. Once we have removed the US from the equation we can work on less developed countries and...wait for it....HELP them to curb emissions.

The way I see it, the US is quite happy to carry on regardless of the grim warnings for the future of the planet because they are scared to death that China will overtake thier ecomony. Something HAS to be done to reduce pollution. The world has to work TOGETHER on this one with Europe and the US leading the way...

the so called redistribution of pollution is, and has to be, a temporary measure...yours is a feeble argument.

yes, the Army is British but the Scots fight on the front line of action in the British army.Most of Britain's wars have occurred under Conservative Governments and Scotland usually votes Labour.
Not a good idea to have Conservative voter's sons in the hardest fighting.
:(
Besides that,everone's scared shitless of Scottish troops.

Mountain Pro, those days have long gone. I think Britain in the sixties was terrific and that's another issue entirely. However, modern Britain is in deep decline (especially since the years between John Major and Blair). I think Tim Collins agrees as well.
I was pointing out to what degree we depend on the U.S. for defence. We aren't really a nucler power at all - the U.S. controls all these defences via satellite, that is Trident.
This is why there are so many Labour M.P.'s wringing their hands but, at the end of the day, Blair does as he's asked, knowing he simply doesn't dare upset the U.S. Administration.
The alternative would be to go it alone and fully join with Europe but that would leave us defenceless seeing as only France has a decent military within the E.U.


nope, Carrera, that wont work either.

tags on most php based forums take the format of bold - [ b ] [ / b ]

you were specifying html.

anyway whats all this USA sumbissive shite you keep spouting these days?

the UK depends on the US military?....does that give you some kind of sexual kick?...

the US army is bigger, thats where it ends. There is no way in hell the UK is inferior to the US militarily except purely in numbers. One-on-one the UK is the best trained army in the world. You will not find any one (including an American) to diasgree with that statement. If they do then they are deluded to the point of stupor.

Physicists such as Saharov borrowed a good deal from Einstein.


Einstein borrowed a good deal from Niels Bohr. The sharing of ideas is built into the very fabric of Scientific process.

"If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." - Isaac Newton - who came up with Gravitation.


As Einstein was the father of nuclear physics, Israel of all nations is entitled to its nuclear weapons.


That does not follow at all.

For what it's worth I don't think that any nation is entitled to hold weapons of mass destruction, particularly one that has a recent track record in invading it's neighbours and Ethnic Cleansing.

"Mutually Assured Destruction" : MAD; stopped America and Russia using nuclear weapons against eachother during the Cold War.

The same concept would seem very attractive to a nation that applauds suicide bombing.

"If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." - Isaac Newton - who came up with Gravitation.

That wasn't actually Newton being modest. The guy was, by all accounts, and absolute arsehole. This comment is an attack at Robert Hooke, who was quite short, and Newtons 'enemy' within the world of Physics. Newton refused to believe that any of Hooke's work could have helped him in any way.

That wasn't actually Newton being modest. The guy was, by all accounts, and absolute arsehole. This comment is an attack at Robert Hooke, who was quite short, and Newtons 'enemy' within the world of Physics. Newton refused to believe that any of Hooke's work could have helped him in any way.

Yeah, I know, but it's a good quote. Apparently Newton was always getting into fights as a kiddie - he certainly didn't conform to the feeble swotty kid stereotype.

you're right, it does restict co2 emissions from the US, being the biggest polluter but 3rd world countries appear to get off lightly. Of course by thinking of yourselves all the time you have missed the fact that Kyoto is designed to reduce WORLD emissions. We start by killing the major criminals (USA). If we want to produce a robust manufacturing industry with very low emissions we will have to spend a lot of time and money on alternatives to current prodecures. The USA has the money, it is the biggest polluter. You put two and two together. Once we have removed the US from the equation we can work on less developed countries and...wait for it....HELP them to curb emissions.

The way I see it, the US is quite happy to carry on regardless of the grim warnings for the future of the planet because they are scared to death that China will overtake thier ecomony. Something HAS to be done to reduce pollution. The world has to work TOGETHER on this one with Europe and the US leading the way...

the so called redistribution of pollution is, and has to be, a temporary measure...yours is a feeble argument.
It might be feeble to you...but we aren't signing that stinking treaty. If we want to reduce emissions then make everyone play by the same rules. Simple stuff.

It might be feeble to you...but we aren't signing that stinking treaty. If we want to reduce emissions then make everyone play by the same rules. Simple stuff.you want the same rules for everybody? bit late for that...just look at the NPNWT....

In all cases, it's a mistake to fight an enemy over a prolonged period. That's the biggest mistake in the book and is partly behind why the Brits are taking heavy casualties in Afghanistan.
If you fight for too long the opposing side gets chance to adapt to the tactics used against them. The U.S. had amazing success against the Taliban and the Iraqi army but they should have pulled out quickly once the job was done. The current situation allows the Taliban to adapt and engage in a hit and run basis and we know what lessonbs Vietnam and Afghanistan hold in the past.
It would also be foolish to imagine the Iraqis won't eventually adapt to methods used against them in previous encounters.

I agree....to a point. I don't think one on one the English army is any better or worse than ours.

The English army is a great ally and a great fighting force.

It's just too bad they come from England apparently as I am starting to not think the same of them.