If it is about Teresa May, pressing the button or not, then put a missile launch pad in her back garden. Surely the point of Trident is that the submarine captain pushes the button after we are all dead - including most probably May!
The problem is that there is Russia, but if they nuked us, it is inconceivable the Americans would let them get away with it - that is the deterrent. The biggest threat is some terrorist dirty bomb - but the people doing that are likely to be citizens of this country. Trident won't be much use in putting that sort of attack off. Maybe spend 10 billion of the31 billion on anti terrorisom and the rest on the NHS. Then tell everybody we still have a deterrent, even if we don't! Simples.
But all of your examples are based on the situation today. What is the situation going to be in 5/10/20/30 years ? What will the threat be then ? Why not defend ourselves to the fullest possible extent that we can realistically afford for now and future generations ?
Militaries are irrelevant. We should get rid of it and just stock up on Nukes. Tell the world: "We ain't going to invade you, or fight foreign wars for rich wankers (bankers and industrial military complex), but we got tonnes of nuclear bombs so if you try and invade us we're going to flat out nuke your capital city."
The problem is that there is Russia, but if they nuked us, it is inconceivable the Americans would let them get away with it - that is the deterrent. The biggest threat is some terrorist dirty bomb - but the people doing that are likely to be citizens of this country. Trident won't be much use in putting that sort of attack off. Maybe spend 10 billion of the31 billion on anti terrorisom and the rest on the NHS. Then tell everybody we still have a deterrent, even if we don't! Simples.
But all of your examples are based on the situation today. What is the situation going to be in 5/10/20/30 years ? What will the threat be then ? Why not defend ourselves to the fullest possible extent that we can realistically afford for now and future generations ?
Always best to base decicions like this on the situation today as we don't know what the situation tomorrow will be. We cant even have a decent guess! We can always buy some cheap nukes if we find we need them! You weren't part of the Brexit campaign were you?
Gooness gracious we have managed to create more fissile material in people's basements in the uk than Iran has managed in decades
(Note I have not researched the physics of this and a small dirty bomb may be capable of being knocked up in a few days with no one noticing up in Wolverhampton or some similar engineering town)
Is it a nuclear deterrent in the sense that it deters a nuclear attack or is it a nuclear deterrent that is in fact nuclear and can/will be used in retaliation to any major attack (Pearl Harbour-sequel)?
How is the second scenario in any way a deterrent?
We no longer have enough servicemen to call ourselves an army. Russian subs plague our trawlers and its thugs trail plutonium across our capital and murder political targets here with barely a murmer from the government. Why are other countries in NATO not following suit? Probably the £40bn cost. Money better spent elsewhere. Out biggest threat is Islamic extremists. Trident subs hardly going to help.
Austerity, ha ha. Money no object. A nuke isn't much use against a suicide bomber, is it? Q. Who is the enemy? A. The people who, whilst crippling local government services, spend our money on nuclear weapons.
It isn't for use against a suicide bomber though is it?
The problem is that there is Russia, but if they nuked us, it is inconceivable the Americans would let them get away with it - that is the deterrent. The biggest threat is some terrorist dirty bomb - but the people doing that are likely to be citizens of this country. Trident won't be much use in putting that sort of attack off. Maybe spend 10 billion of the31 billion on anti terrorisom and the rest on the NHS. Then tell everybody we still have a deterrent, even if we don't! Simples.
But all of your examples are based on the situation today. What is the situation going to be in 5/10/20/30 years ? What will the threat be then ? Why not defend ourselves to the fullest possible extent that we can realistically afford for now and future generations ?
Always best to base decicions like this on the situation today as we don't know what the situation tomorrow will be. We cant even have a decent guess! We can always buy some cheap nukes if we find we need them! You weren't part of the Brexit campaign were you?
Of course not.
It would probably be too late to buy some cheap nukes by the time we needed to use them. Defending our country is never going to be cheap but it's a price worth paying.
Defending our country from what? The Russians? How do the Swiss and Norwegians defend themselves against them? I'm not a member of CND, it is just that it is obvious that there is no strategic reason for having Trident when you understand how it works or is supposed to work. When you use it, it has failed! There are cheaper alternatives that will do the same job!
Defending our country from what? The Russians? How do the Swiss and Norwegians defend themselves against them? I'm not a member of CND, it is just that it is obvious that there is no strategic reason for having Trident when you understand how it works or is supposed to work. When you use it, it has failed! There are cheaper alternatives that will do the same job!
Again, the Russians are a threat (one of many) today, Trident is a deterrent designed to last 20/30 years.
I think nukes have helped prevent war - you have some people who don't care and oppose them out of principle. But you also have some who say we need more for similar reasons! But how many nukes constitute a deterrent? I just look at the theory about how trident works and try to apply it to the current and a changing world. Unfortunately too many, IMO, do the exact opposite. I think the threat of us being nuked has never been greater, but that threat comes from people living amongst us. How would Trident deter them? Maybe we will need to nuke Leeds or Birmingham!!!! That amount of money could serve us better, including a portion of it on defence. Maybe support our armed forces a bit better for starters!
To be honest, it doesn't matter if you push the button or not in terms of Trident. Your people are dead already! But you can't say you won't or it is pointless. It is all a bit ridiculous really as it is pointless anyway! Spend the money on the threat/ If the Russians nuked Switzerland it would start World War 3. That is the Swiss deterrent and it works just as well for us! They don't need Trident! Nor do we for the same reason!
Difficult to target joss (not a massive expert on Chinese type thoughts on why shit smelling aroma is good for luck) from a poxy nuclear submarine under the water.
Pretty bad joss situation if the sharper atoms don't play ball and break out from the containing enclosure.
Comments
No point having it if first person to fire knows you won't retaliate. That would be the complete antithesis of a deterrent.
"We ain't going to invade you, or fight foreign wars for rich wankers (bankers and industrial military complex), but we got tonnes of nuclear bombs so if you try and invade us we're going to flat out nuke your capital city."
http://c.newsnow.co.uk/A/2/840481375?-37671:24708:0
Well done labour ignoring that crank Corbyn
Gooness gracious we have managed to create more fissile material in people's basements in the uk than Iran has managed in decades
(Note I have not researched the physics of this and a small dirty bomb may be capable of being knocked up in a few days with no one noticing up in Wolverhampton or some similar engineering town)
It would probably be too late to buy some cheap nukes by the time we needed to use them. Defending our country is never going to be cheap but it's a price worth paying.
So it contaminates a small range with radioactivity as well as the comventional blast damage.
Should have know that sorry.
Nor seeing that as more difficult than a man in charge of a petrol tanker.
Just shows what a pathetic question it was to ask in the first place
No wonder the public voted to ignore so many of these people when deciding brexit,
If that's the only question a member of parliament can ask over trident then the whole country is fkd
; )
I think we should give it to Boris.
Pretty bad joss situation if the sharper atoms don't play ball and break out from the containing enclosure.
2/3 submarines becomes quite quickly 1/2?