Could someone explain the whole Trident thing to me, do Nuclear weapons have an expiry date? or is it just the case of getting bigger and better bombs.
General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Could someone explain the whole Trident thing to me, do Nuclear weapons have an expiry date? or is it just the case of getting bigger and better bombs.
He didn't actually 'call' for her to resign, I watched the interview.
It was put to him that Cameron's policy advisor an an ex chief constable have said she should resign, and does he agree.
He said he agreed, but that the election was thursday anyway so its already in the publics hands. I thought it was a good response.
It was put to him that Cameron's policy advisor an an ex chief constable have said she should resign, and does he agree.
He said he agreed, but that the election was thursday anyway so its already in the publics hands. I thought it was a good response.
He's giving the Tories a taste of their own medicine. Hopefully this sticks to Theresa and she's seen as soft on policing, dash in a pinch of the Saudi-ISIS links and and she'll probably buckle.
Its not the bombs being changed, its the submarines.
It's not the warheads and missiles, it's the submarines.
Well security is gonna be a major topic anyway in public space in light of recent events plus May and tories are trying. To. Push him on the corner on that so he may as well go all out on her weak. Spot as well.
He called out Saudi Arabia directly by name as a funder of terrorism. That is why you won;t see it anywhere.
It's an absolute master stroke to be honest. There is no way the media can ignore him calling for someone in her position to resign over gross negligence. It also absolutely blows to pieces her image of being "tough on immigration" and "good for security". The fact of the matter is that cuts she made directly impeded the police's ability to keep the country safe and we've had a number of terrorist incidents that ranking police officers of past and present have said could have been prevented if they had the resources.
She was told about the risks by various Police officials and not only did she choose to ignore it, she accused them of fear mongering and look who was right. What's worse is that she is now fear mongering herself over homeland security issues yet rather than promising more resources to the police so they can actually do their job, she is pushing other parts of their manifesto like cyber censorship and government control of internet which are just token policies that will have a far greater impact on the average man than it will on the terrorists ability to network and plot covertly.
Thanks..right and is it really a necessity that the submarines are upgraded? like does it affect our nuclear capabilities, is it urgent that we upgrade them?
Has the Saudi Arabia/report sections of that speech been shown on the BBC yet? If not, I'm sure Sir Roger Carr being Chairman of BAE Systems whilst also serving on the BBC's governing body has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Look at this, this is why she is dangerous. The Q&A with journalists
Q: Corbyn says he will give the police new resources. Can you match that?
May says people should look at Corbyn’s record. He has always opposed giving the police new powers.
So, no she will not give the police more resources (she was still discussing further cuts just a month ago).
But what is worse is that now, after two attacks in a fortnight, when discussing national security, she still employs dissembling bollocks to avoid answering questions.
She treats the country with contempt.
Q: Corbyn says he will give the police new resources. Can you match that?
May says people should look at Corbyn’s record. He has always opposed giving the police new powers.
So, no she will not give the police more resources (she was still discussing further cuts just a month ago).
But what is worse is that now, after two attacks in a fortnight, when discussing national security, she still employs dissembling bollocks to avoid answering questions.
She treats the country with contempt.
'Sadiq Khan says the police need the support of citizens. But it is also true that the more resources they have, the easier it is for them to do their job. It is a fact that the Met has lost £600m for its budget. There are plans to cut the Met budget in the future by £400m, and to change the policing formula too, which would also cut the Met’s funding.'
(Guardian)
(Guardian)
If we want to retain a nuclear deterrent, then yes. The current subs are well past their sell by date.
Considering doing so for the last couple of months has seemingly earned her another 5 years as PM, why would she stop now?
I think its obvious the Tories will win but will they get a majority?
Metal becomes brittle (which is deadly in submarines), at some point electronics get harder and harder to update. The youngest of the 4 is 19 years old.
That is Cressida Dick getting around Purdah. She was stood next to him. She can't comment on political stuff during an election, but he can.
I don't personally know a single Labour voter outside of this forum, so this reaction is a useful window if nothing else.
Glad this is finally being used. It's not dirty, it's not playing politics, it's a bloody fact.
A window into the company you keep, and little more.
I know plenty of voters of all kinds, lifelong tory voters, even a couple of ukippers. I can't imagine and insular world of such strict viewpoints, must be dull as feck.
Steve Hilton ffs.
Understood. Thanks guys.
There is more to the political landscape than than Labour. You retorted with a lot of nonsense from what was an innocent and mild remark. I believe there was a discussion about this sort of mindset among Corbyn loyalists yesterday.
We have four vanguard class submarines built between 1986 and 1998. These are due to be replaced. Every year they remain in operation costs money to extend their lives (some are slightly newer than others).
Each Vanguard Submarine can take up to 16 US made Lockheed Trident II missiles (although the actual operating number might be fewer). Each missile can take up to 12 warheads and each warhead can strike a separate target, possibly hundreds or thousands of miles apart.
16 missiles, 12 warheads is 192 separate targets. Each warhead I believe has around 4 times the power of the Hiroshima bomb (from memory). The warheads and missiles are 100% maintained by the United States, although they do not require US codes to be detonated.
Clearly each Submarine has the power to totally annihilate an enemy state, and that is the point.
Trident is by design, a "second strike" weapon. If you wipe us out, we will wipe you out. The UK Prime Minister gives each submarine commander a letter telling them what to do in the event the UK is wiped out; nothing, join an allied state, if there is one, or retaliate. The UK does not have tactical nuclear weapons (nuclear weapons to be used on the battlefield), so Piers Morgan's suggested that we should Nuke ISIS is stupid (if we needed to, we would ask the US to do it).
In general I believe that Trident makes the use of Nuclear Weapons less likely, just as it is designed to do as Nuclear Deterrent. Deterrent. Noun. a thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something.
However there are problems with Trident:
- Are our enemies able to track our submarines?
- Have they hacked them or installed some sort of secret kill-switch?
- All our submarines need to birth every few years. Taking them out whilst docked would be trivial.
- The lack of Nuclear Launch codes makes a warhead going off whilst being maintained, or in another situation, more likely.
- Our missiles and warheads are made by the US. Maybe they too have installed a kill switch, or maybe there is a flaw in the design (see firing the wrong way recently).
- If we elected a Trump/Nixon type figure, would he authorize their use unnecessarily (Deference Secretary Michael Fallon recently spoke about using them).
- Arguably, the biggest threat from Nuclear Weapons isn't from Iran, North Korea or Russian strike... but from a "sum of all fears" scenario where terrorists of rogue national agents simply walk a nuclear weapon into one of our cities. Indeed, realistically, it would actually be stupid for a foreign country to fire nuclear weapons at another country these days. Just walk them in on a lorry....
To add to this, Australia are not part of NATO, have no official protection from the Nuclear Umbrella (unofficially maybe they do), they often supply troops to fight wars in the middle east... And they have not been nuked. Does trident really provide useful protection in the 21st century?
Last edited:
How is this possible? What bubble do you live in?
I know people voting for every major party in the UK and then some.
What an odd reply. You said all you know is one outlook, I replied I associate daily with friends of all outlooks, disagreeing politically does not mean I don't like someone.
And your response is to tell me their is more than one outlook?
It makes absolutely no sense, at all.
Paraphrased from Neil Kinnock's speech:
If Theresa May wins on Thursday, I warn you not to be ordinary. I warn you not to be young. I warn you not to fall ill. And I warn you not to grow old.
If Theresa May wins on Thursday, I warn you not to be ordinary. I warn you not to be young. I warn you not to fall ill. And I warn you not to grow old.
He is already vulnerable on those points. Tory pollsters are going around houses bringing up the IRA. He needs to strike back. As it stood this terror attack was going to give the Torries an easy win.
The police cuts gives him an angle to throw the soft on terror back at her.
It won't work with everyone but some will accept his argument.
Last edited:
Guardian: Here are some more lines from Jeremy Corbyn’s inteview with ITV news.
On the issues of policing - the Government has been warned repeatedly about police cuts, and the Police Federation and many others (have said) how 20,000 have gone down over the past seven years.
We’ve said we’d put 10,000 back immediately and also increase the number of security officers that are available, because clearly intelligence is a very important part of this."
As far as I am concerned the police act, as they did on Saturday, as they did in Manchester, in defence of innocent life. That is a reasonable and proportionate response, as happened in Westminster."
- Corbyn criticised the government for cutting police numbers - but declined to say that that made Theresa May to some extent responsible for what happened on Saturday night. Asked if he held May “in any way” responsible and if the cuts to the police contributed to the London Bridge atrocity, he replied:
On the issues of policing - the Government has been warned repeatedly about police cuts, and the Police Federation and many others (have said) how 20,000 have gone down over the past seven years.
We’ve said we’d put 10,000 back immediately and also increase the number of security officers that are available, because clearly intelligence is a very important part of this."
- He denied ever opposing police being allowed to operate a “shoot-to-kill” policy when lives are at risk. The Tories have repeated accused Corbyn of opposing “shoot-to-kill”, on the basis of an interview he gave to the BBC in 2015, and May raised this claim again in her speech and Q&A this morning. But Corbyn said that his comments had been taken out of context and that the BBC Trust concluded that the BBC report did not accurately report what he meant. He said:
As far as I am concerned the police act, as they did on Saturday, as they did in Manchester, in defence of innocent life. That is a reasonable and proportionate response, as happened in Westminster."
I'm quite the opposite. All of my friends I have spoken to about politics are voting Labour. Even at work, the few I have heard speak on politics hint at voting Labour. I even looked on the facebook of a lad who I went to school with who was typically anti left wing and vocal with his support of the Tories and this guy is sharing pro Labour stuff to my surprise.
The only people I personally know that are voting Tory are my parents and sister.
There are areas of the country where Labour is practically nonexistent.
Because i don't know any Labour voters i live an insular world of strict viewpoints? No consideration that there are other political persuasions, or that Labour could, quite justifiably, be unpopular locally.
Perfect. Well, I guess he could have randomly mentioned Saudi Arabia mid sentence so they'd be forced to run with it.
Not really, unless he is in Northern Ireland.
Im in Kent, i think Nick is too (maybe).
95% of signs around here are supporting the conservatives (its sickening). But i still know many Labour voters and Green voters and UKIP and Lib Dem voters and no voters
What was the voting results from your consitiency like in 2015 (roughly)
Ok I know Labour voters in Kent. There are areas that are pretty much a straight fight between Leb Dems and Tory though. Some areas in the south west for instance.
Why are we grilling Nick on this exactly? Pretty sure there's been people that say they don't know any Tory voters in here before now, it's not that weird.
I guess so. Maybe you're right.
I know everyone from the left to the far left.