[Grug]

Obviously Britain would have supreme control, what with us having the strongest existing military, the best economy, most stable government, best technology and most respect from the international community.

And we founded the goddamn Commonwealth when the Empire fell to ****.

And they [almost] all still recognise the Queen as the Head of State.

Hehehe, I can pretty much guarantee that it would never happen then.

It would have to be some type of democratic system I think, and that would be scratchy at best. Also, probably as usefull as the UN >..>

On a side note, I'm not so sure how much longer Australia will remain part of the Commonwealth...

[Black Wolf]

We can be a republic and still be part of the Commonwealth. India is in a similar situation I think.

[Kosh]

20% of all governmental income in total of all the Commonwealth?

On the other hand, many of Britains former colonies were in Africa (it did control 30 something percent of the continent), so what is 20% of nothing?

India for ultimate control?

India can't even control it's own country, much less anyone else. Besides, China kicked their ass 30 years ago and they won't forget about it any time soon.

[Grug]

We can be a republic and still be part of the Commonwealth. India is in a similar situation I think.

Yeah I guess. Probably not with Johnny in charge though.

[Martinus]

Just to make an on-topic note, modernising nuclear warheads breaks the non-proliferation treaty.

That's a bunch of nonsense though. Everyone knows that anyone owning nukes will be modifying them constantly as new technology comes along to make them 'more safe', 'last longer' etc. etc.

As for the main topic, I think that the UK should have nuclear weapons as america constantly proves it cannot and should not be trusted to live at peace with the rest of the world.

Anyhow, the fact that the UK uses a substantial number of sub based nukes is enough to deter everyone.

[aceofspades]

So...you're saying UK should have capable nuke arsenal because the US is a dangerously volatile nuclear capability?
I see why everyone talks about nukes 'proliferating' - more like 'being fruitful and multiplying, really really fast'.
God, I hate international relations. Sometimes it seems like the only thing their good for is destroying nations.

[Grug]

So...you're saying UK should have capable nuke arsenal because the US is a dangerously volatile nuclear capability?
I see why everyone talks about nukes 'proliferating' - more like 'being fruitful and multiplying, really really fast'.
God, I hate international relations. Sometimes it seems like the only thing their good for is destroying nations.

Globalist party ftw?