59% of Britons Say They Support Launching a Nuclear Strike

14

A new poll released by Yougov.uk has found that 59% of Brits say they support dropping a  nuclear bomb, in 2016. More specifically, 59% said that they would personally be willing to ‘press the button’ to release a nuclear strike they knew would kill over 100,000 innocent people.

The poll was not conducted randomly or out of the blue, rather, it was conducted in response to Prime Minister Teresa May’s statements two weeks ago. When asked in parliament if she was “prepared to personally authorize a nuclear strike that could kill 100,000 innocent men, women and children,” Teresa May responded “yes” and was met with resounding applause from members of parliament no less.

Knowing how sensitive this topic is and how controversial these statements might be, Yougov.uk set out to find how many of the citizens supported what their new prime minister had to say. The result is extremely unsettling. According to the data, not only did 66% of respondents support May’s position, 59% said they would be willing to authorize the strike themselves.

It is truly a sad time we are living in. What is this world coming to where so many people could say such a thing?


You want to support Anonymous Independent & Investigative News? Please, follow us on Twitter: 


This article (59% of Britons Say They Support Launching a Nuclear Strike) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article using a creative commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQJoin the conversations at www.anonboards.com.

Get Your Anonymous T-Shirt / Sweatshirt / Hoodie / Tanktop, Smartphone or Tablet Cover or Mug In Our Spreadshirt Shop! Click Here

Loading...

14 COMMENTS

  1. This really is a stupid article. Launch a strike against whom? Haiti? Whoever came up with this crap needs to get his or her head out of his or her own nether region.

  2. Of course She is right and so too all the people you questioned. It simply depends upon the circumstances. If the UK is under a direct clear and present threat ( and not a Tony Blair lying pally USA statement of gross inaccuracy for his means type of threat) then yes we should strike before 10,000’s of innocent UK men women and children die. This decision is made by Parliament and as they are elected representatives then they should ie in our favor.

    • So a British man,woman, child, is better than another countries men, women and children and that makes it right to annihilate them? Stupid senseless kretin

      • No, but it is a government’s job to protect their people first, that’s why it’s “your” government.

        Also, based on your logic, what conversely makes their lives more valuable than British ones? If it’s going to be 50,000 people either way, why shouldn’t a government choose to save their own? By not launching, you still have the same amount of people dead. Not to mention if you wait to be attacked first, your people die, and then you 99% respond and attack back, so you just end up with even more dead than going on the offensive. Why do you think Japan was bombed in WW2? It saved more lives than it took.

        • Were you Dropped on your head or something my friend. Japan Was bombed as revenge for pearl harbour the japs were already on the brink of surrender. Their economy had collapsed they had run out of resources to maintain a war. The dropping of 2 bombs not 1 showed that the Americans wanted revenge not a surrender from the japs

  3. When it come to life and death decisions the eople of England would be better to round up their politicians and shoot the lot of them. Noone really wants nuclear war. The weapons are supposed to be a deterent from war.

  4. I see no problem with this. That’s the whole point of deterrence. People have been saying shit like this for decades.

  5. It was a sample of 1,661 people asked out of a population of 65,149,897 and mostly 25-49+ so let’s be realistic. No, not 59% of Britons “support dropping a nuclear bomb” if you want to make a article please check yourself before you wreck yourself, I am sick and tired of seeing these BS articles no fact checking just propagating bias, opinionated arse fodder.

  6. This is one reason i cannot believe the postings from this annon site. Its far too left and to believe at one moment that a country would not use their arsenal would defile them into potential attack. One must show that if you intend decimation on me, i will decimate you. It is called MAD and has kept the majority large scale war from happening for a very long time and will continue to. We are not in a utopian world, MAD keeps us safe, if that is the best term.

  7. Those type of people never experience the death of their loved ones or maybe they’re the type of people who feel powerless against those on top that they would willing to destroy the current system and make a new one even if it means using nuclear bombs to do it…

  8. I find it is always easy to talk about killing when you not the one doing it but it is a big difference between actually being able to do it and then live with the knowledge everday of what you did verses just talking about it. You can talk all you want but until the day comes and you know you have blood on your hands it can become hard to live with what you did. Only fools talk about using such a bomb. 10,000 degrees plus coming at you, you have to be a dam fool to ever even consider such a thing.

  9. I would’ve added, “shall the future heed my words, for should they choose a different path, a different outcome they shall receive.”
    I’m with Britain.
    For those asking, “Nuke whom”? Well, she clearly mentioned Russian Nuclear supply…… come on now.

  10. Well if the thundering nitwits in government need us to say it For them again, then here it is in plain language: There can be no legitimate purpose for nuclear weapons.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here