We gave up trying to build missiles in the 1960s but we still make our own warheads, yes. So do the French. I'd be happy to upgrade but I think the rest of the armed forces should be reduced to a minimal shadow of its current level in exchange - if it's a deterrent then it deters, who needs armed forces as well? We could have an extra hundred thousand plain-clothes police in exchange and still make a huge saving.
The advantage of a nuclear deterrent in Europe is that it's under more than one command (one French and one British), each has a few hundred warheads, and they're not locked onto any single landmass. I think it's an essential, unlike the conventional armed forces themselves which have all the utility of a dole-queue.
Britian and the bomb...
Britian and the bomb...
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Britian and the bomb...
flopstock;575919 wrote:
How do you folks feel about being able to wipe out a country at the push of a button? Do you feel the capability is a deterent to hostile forces?
Don't want 'em, don't need 'em, don't like 'em.
Yes they are a deterrant but the live in a different world to the one in which they were needed. Gone are the days of staring across the iron curtain at the bogeyman enemy who was to be hated at all costs, when the four minute warning was an everyday reallity. The need now is for a police function and that cannot be provided by a stash of atomic weapons.
By all means keep the existing set for the next twenty five years until they're life expired, then scrap them. If, during that time, a burning need arises (like trouble with China) we'll have enough to keep the status quo until more can be brought into service.
In the current environment, especially with the threats being made to Iran and North Korea, it would be wrong to commission more.
How do you folks feel about being able to wipe out a country at the push of a button? Do you feel the capability is a deterent to hostile forces?
Don't want 'em, don't need 'em, don't like 'em.
Yes they are a deterrant but the live in a different world to the one in which they were needed. Gone are the days of staring across the iron curtain at the bogeyman enemy who was to be hated at all costs, when the four minute warning was an everyday reallity. The need now is for a police function and that cannot be provided by a stash of atomic weapons.
By all means keep the existing set for the next twenty five years until they're life expired, then scrap them. If, during that time, a burning need arises (like trouble with China) we'll have enough to keep the status quo until more can be brought into service.
In the current environment, especially with the threats being made to Iran and North Korea, it would be wrong to commission more.
Britian and the bomb...
Bryn Mawr;575931 wrote: Don't want 'em, don't need 'em, don't like 'em.
Yes they are a deterrant but the live in a different world to the one in which they were needed. Gone are the days of staring across the iron curtain at the bogeyman enemy who was to be hated at all costs, when the four minute warning was an everyday reallity.
It's a reasonable attitude when you're not a natural first-use nation and I can't see the next bomb going off in anger having a Union Jack on its side. But in a possible near-future world where a dozen or so have been unsheathed Trident will become invaluable and not a thing that can be rebuilt once it's become obsolescent.
The days of which you speak, young man, are those of "The War Game" where it was use them or lose them very early on as tensions spilled over, and lots of bangs in consequence. The coming days, by contrast, are the use of these things as diplomatic punctuation marks once the world gets used to the shock of seeing a mushroom cloud or three on the evening news.
Yes they are a deterrant but the live in a different world to the one in which they were needed. Gone are the days of staring across the iron curtain at the bogeyman enemy who was to be hated at all costs, when the four minute warning was an everyday reallity.
It's a reasonable attitude when you're not a natural first-use nation and I can't see the next bomb going off in anger having a Union Jack on its side. But in a possible near-future world where a dozen or so have been unsheathed Trident will become invaluable and not a thing that can be rebuilt once it's become obsolescent.
The days of which you speak, young man, are those of "The War Game" where it was use them or lose them very early on as tensions spilled over, and lots of bangs in consequence. The coming days, by contrast, are the use of these things as diplomatic punctuation marks once the world gets used to the shock of seeing a mushroom cloud or three on the evening news.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Britian and the bomb...
spot;575948 wrote: It's a reasonable attitude when you're not a natural first-use nation and I can't see the next bomb going off in anger having a Union Jack on its side. But in a possible near-future world where a dozen or so have been unsheathed Trident will become invaluable and not a thing that can be rebuilt once it's become obsolescent.
The days of which you speak, young man, are those of "The War Game" where it was use them or lose them very early on as tensions spilled over, and lots of bangs in consequence. The coming days, by contrast, are the use of these things as diplomatic punctuation marks once the world gets used to the shock of seeing a mushroom cloud or three on the evening news.
May that never happen!
The concepts of battlefield nukes and clean bombs have always escaped me - they're a tactical nightmare - and I sincerely hope that you didn't mean one of the big buggors
The days of which you speak, young man, are those of "The War Game" where it was use them or lose them very early on as tensions spilled over, and lots of bangs in consequence. The coming days, by contrast, are the use of these things as diplomatic punctuation marks once the world gets used to the shock of seeing a mushroom cloud or three on the evening news.
May that never happen!
The concepts of battlefield nukes and clean bombs have always escaped me - they're a tactical nightmare - and I sincerely hope that you didn't mean one of the big buggors
Britian and the bomb...
spot;575948 wrote: The coming days, by contrast, are the use of these things as diplomatic punctuation marks once the world gets used to the shock of seeing a mushroom cloud or three on the evening news.
That si the most depressing thing I have ever read. These things are not in any way "diplomatic punctuation marks". Atomic weapons - and I include depleted uranium munitions in that description, are unnecessary, expensive, dangerous to both the target and the user.
They are also dangerous to the continuing existence of the world as we know it.
That si the most depressing thing I have ever read. These things are not in any way "diplomatic punctuation marks". Atomic weapons - and I include depleted uranium munitions in that description, are unnecessary, expensive, dangerous to both the target and the user.
They are also dangerous to the continuing existence of the world as we know it.
An ye harm none, do what ye will....
Britian and the bomb...
flopstock;575979 wrote: Blair Wins Approval for Nuclear Sub Plan on Conservative Votes
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... o&refer=uk
wow, you guys don't mess around, do you?.. Wham bam thank you mam...get in, get it done, get out...
we should move so quickly on anything over here..
Doing it before they lose their big majority - but having said that, they only got a 250+ majority on this because the opposition propped them up.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... o&refer=uk
wow, you guys don't mess around, do you?.. Wham bam thank you mam...get in, get it done, get out...
we should move so quickly on anything over here..
Doing it before they lose their big majority - but having said that, they only got a 250+ majority on this because the opposition propped them up.