[News] UK to increase nuclear warheads by 40%

[Hotchilidog]

What does that even mean ?
We unfortunately are in the most geographically important part of Europe when it comes to a deterrent from Russia , and with Putin in charge and seeking to change the law in order to keep himself in power indefinitely our defences whether you or i like it or not are a necessity .

Russia has long known we have the early warning systems to alert the USA in time for them to make a retaliatory strike in the event of a Russian first strike , RAF Fylingdales was created for such an event .

Yep Russia is shaking in it's boots at our nuclear deterrent.

 

[Chicken Run]

Yep Russia is shaking in it's boots at our nuclear deterrent.

Having worked along side our nuclear deterrent I can confirm you are correct!

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Johnson has liberated us from an EU money sponge , opened trade talks with Japan , Canada , USA , Australia , China , India and individual countries within Europe . He has achieved more trade since Jan 1st than the EU has done in the last 25 years , over 1500 finance companies opening in the UK , even Cadbury`s is coming home , anyone want to bet on American Express returning ? .

Look if you don`t like Boris fine , but don`t sell out the progress to this country for a cheap shot at a politician "you don`t like " . The EU said we fail , they were wrong we are thriving , yes i can hear the calls that we are skint , so is the entire WORLD on the back of this pandemic , which makes the progress Boris is making all the more impressive .

I have no time for anyone who , when wrong or proven beyond doubt to be wrong , wont admit that they are indeed wrong , but Boris owns it and owns it all , only a narrow minded person wouldn`t respect that . If you want change for change`s sake then good luck because anything that is working or has a chance to work will be torn down , that is what the opposition does .

I think you 're spot on with that assessment
Regards
DF

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I hadn't seen anything on the news about this, and certainly hope this isn't right, but

Russia condemns UK plan to increase nuclear weapons as threat to ‘international stability’

Russia has condemned the decision by the UK government to boost its arsenal of nuclear weapons, saying the move would harm international stability. The UK will increase the cap on its nuclear warhead stockpile by more than 40 per cent, prime minister Boris Johnson revealed as part of his foreign and defence policy review on Tuesday.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-nuclear-weapons-uk-boris-johnson-b1818339.html

After many, many years of all the major powers around the world working on reducing nuclear warheads, just the 2 questions

1. Why ?
2. How are we going to pay for it given our current debt situation ?

If we ever reach the stage where the UK has to chip in to a wider conflict by firing even ONE nuclear weapon, then it's game for the planet shirley? SO last century thinking. It's all about the bat-shagging premise nowadays

 

[paulfuzz]

I believe it to be true that a person carrying a gun is much more likely to be the victim of gun crime, could the same be said for holding nuclear weapons? If so Britain would be a primary target for any would be foe.

Surely get rid of nuclear weapons and use the money to fund the Great British ingenuity to provide UK and Ireland with a ballistic missile defence system.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

I believe it to be true that a person carrying a gun is much more likely to be the victim of gun crime, could the same be said for holding nuclear weapons? If so Britain would be a primary target for any would be foe.

Surely get rid of nuclear weapons and use the money to fund the Great British ingenuity to provide UK and Ireland with a ballistic missile defence system.

I was at a party back in the 80's where this girl had the same thought and clearly did not understand deterrent. So somebody explained to her using this story.
Imagine you live in a flat on your own and you know the man next door wants to get in your knickers, but you're very much not interested.
You know the man next door has a gun and is a possible rape perpetrator, so the risk is that he may come knocking and force his desires upon you at gun point [sexual assault & rape].
Now, imagine how much less likely that might happen [deterrent] if the man next door KNOWS you have a gun too?

Not a perfect analogy I'll grant, but she understood why the UK MUST continue to have a Nuclear deterrent.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

We'd be gone b4 there was a chance to retaliate anyway. Better spent elsewhere

What an illiterate and ignorant comment - have you no idea how Trident works?

Edit: Oh, unless you're in which case; top wooshing

 

[WATFORD zero]

I was at a party back in the 80's where this girl had the same thought and clearly did not understand deterrent. So somebody explained to her using this story.
Imagine you live in a flat on your own and you know the man next door wants to get in your knickers, but you're very much not interested.
You know the man next door has a gun and is a possible rape perpetrator, so the risk is that he may come knocking and force his desires upon you at gun point [sexual assault & rape].
Now, imagine how much less likely that might happen [deterrent] if the man next door KNOWS you have a gun too?

Not a perfect analogy I'll grant, but she understood why the UK MUST continue to have a Nuclear deterrent.

The old NRA argument, which ends at the obvious conclusion that the way to stop all gun crime is to ensure that everyone in the UK MUST carry guns

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

The old NRA argument, which ends at the obvious conclusion that the way to stop all crime is to ensure that everyone in the UK MUST carry guns

No, I did suggest that the next-door gun holder was not a perfect analogy. Only an attempt to explain deterrent in a scenario this girl could associate herself with.

Whether all citizens have the right to carry a gun [eg USA] or not [eg UK] will not stop all crime - daft suggestion.

 

[WATFORD zero]

No, I did suggest that the next-door gun holder was not a perfect analogy. Only an attempt to explain deterrent in a scenario this girl could associate herself with.

Whether all citizens have the right to carry a gun [eg USA] or not [eg UK] will not stop all crime - daft suggestion.

I'm sorry, but I personally think it's as daft as your analogy for trying to justify why minor international powers on the world stage should spend their limited resources on having (never mind increasing) nuclear weapons.

I can't see how Germany, Australia or Japan are less safe than the UK, despite none of them having the 'deterrent' of nuclear weapons

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

I'm sorry, but I personally think it's as daft as your analogy for trying to justify why minor international powers on the world stage should spend their limited resources on having (never mind increasing) nuclear weapons.

I can't see how Germany, Australia or Japan are less safe than the UK, despite none of them having the 'deterrent' of nuclear weapons

Not my analogy, one I heard being used to explain to someone who didn't understand deterrent. And I've already conceded it's not a perfect analogy.
I would suggest that the likes of Germany, Australia and Japan are equally as safe as the UK because of deterrent even though they don't have a finger on the trigger.

The graph below identifies who has the nuclear threat / deterrent - it's clear to me that the "sides" both carry the threat [perhaps with the exception of Israel] - so East v West and Pakistan v India - both sides hold the threat / deterrent which [seems so far to] prevent nuclear weapons use - if UK gave up our nuclear weapons and invested in our other undoubted needs [eg NHS], would the world be any closer to nuclear warfare? Probably not, but it's a dangerous game of poker.

 

[Baker lite]

Because it distracts from the mess the UK has created with Covid and Brexit ?

Genuine [emoji23]

 

[WATFORD zero]

Not my analogy, one I heard being used to explain to someone who didn't understand deterrent. And I've already conceded it's not a perfect analogy.
I would suggest that the likes of Germany, Australia and Japan are equally as safe as the UK because of deterrent even though they don't have a finger on the trigger.

The graph below identifies who has the nuclear threat / deterrent - it's clear to me that the "sides" both carry the threat [perhaps with the exception of Israel] - so East v West and Pakistan v India - both sides hold the threat / deterrent which [seems so far to] prevent nuclear weapons use - if UK gave up our nuclear weapons and invested in our other undoubted needs [eg NHS], would the world be any closer to nuclear warfare? Probably not, but it's a dangerous game of poker.

View attachment 135002

I can see that Russia and USA's weapons are deterring one another from using them on one another and India/Pakistan but who are the UK deterring? France? And whose is the 'deterrent' (that they haven't got their finger on) deterring who from doing what to Germany, Australia and Japan ?

I don't see how any decision on the UK having, expanding or getting rid of nuclear weapons is going to have any effect and rather than it being a 'dangerous game of poker' it is, and has been for many years, an almighty waste of money. It could definitely be used elsewhere in the same way the other 186 countries in the world do rather than on the nuclear weapons where the 9 on your slide have decided to 'invest'.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

I can see that Russia and USA's weapons are deterring one another from using them on one another and India/Pakistan but who are the UK deterring? France? And whose is the 'deterrent' (that they haven't got their finger on) deterring who from doing what to Germany, Australia and Japan ?

I don't see how any decision on the UK having, expanding or getting rid of nuclear weapons is going to have any effect and rather than it being a 'dangerous game of poker' it is, and has been for many years, an almighty waste of money. It could definitely be used elsewhere in the same way the other 186 countries in the world do rather than on the nuclear weapons where the 9 on your slide have decided to 'invest'.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree

The days of UK and France being at war with each other are long since passed so the nuclear weapons that UK and France hold are not to deter each other - bit silly on you to suggest really.
Maybe Germany, as part of NATO feel that protection comes from that "family". Maybe it's because German unification bought East & West together so there's no war to have there?

Happy to agree to disagree ...

 

[paulfuzz]

I was at a party back in the 80's where this girl had the same thought and clearly did not understand deterrent. So somebody explained to her using this story.
Imagine you live in a flat on your own and you know the man next door wants to get in your knickers, but you're very much not interested.
You know the man next door has a gun and is a possible rape perpetrator, so the risk is that he may come knocking and force his desires upon you at gun point [sexual assault & rape].
Now, imagine how much less likely that might happen [deterrent] if the man next door KNOWS you have a gun too?

Not a perfect analogy I'll grant, but she understood why the UK MUST continue to have a Nuclear deterrent.

Why isn't the ballistic missile defence system a deterrent??
Surely if the foe is aware of your defence system then there is little point wasting their weapons on the country.
Maybe the girl in your analogy should go to self defence classes and then if the assailant does try anything then she has both the confidence and capabilities to disarm and disable the attacker.
If the attacker does use the gun it would not really matter if she had a gun.

 

[nicko31]

Johnson has liberated us from an EU money sponge , opened trade talks with Japan , Canada , USA , Australia , China , India and individual countries within Europe . He has achieved more trade since Jan 1st than the EU has done in the last 25 years , over 1500 finance companies opening in the UK , even Cadbury`s is coming home , anyone want to bet on American Express returning ? .

Look if you don`t like Boris fine , but don`t sell out the progress to this country for a cheap shot at a politician "you don`t like " . The EU said we fail , they were wrong we are thriving , yes i can hear the calls that we are skint , so is the entire WORLD on the back of this pandemic , which makes the progress Boris is making all the more impressive .

I have no time for anyone who , when wrong or proven beyond doubt to be wrong , wont admit that they are indeed wrong , but Boris owns it and owns it all , only a narrow minded person wouldn`t respect that . If you want change for change`s sake then good luck because anything that is working or has a chance to work will be torn down , that is what the opposition does .

I'm not sure whether this is a serious post or not or you are just taking the piss

If you are serious please re-post it on the Brexit thread and we can pull this apart line by line.

 

[Chicken Run]

Why isn't the ballistic missile defence system a deterrent??
Surely if the foe is aware of your defence system then there is little point wasting their weapons on the country.
Maybe the girl in your analogy should go to self defence classes and then if the assailant does try anything then she has both the confidence and capabilities to disarm and disable the attacker.
If the attacker does use the gun it would not really matter if she had a gun.

So the girl takes her fists to a gunfight eh?

Good one [emoji2356]

 

[paulfuzz]

So the girl takes her fists to a gunfight eh?

Good one [emoji2356]

I am assuming that the assailant wants to have his wicked way, so the gun is essentially a threat, not much anyone could do if the plan is to shoot first.

 

[Chicken Run]

I am assuming that the assailant wants to have his wicked way, so the gun is essentially a threat, not much anyone could do if the plan is to shoot first.

How about the girl says you come through my door and the rest of your family get wiped?

 

[paulfuzz]

How about the girl says you come through my door and the rest of your family get wiped?

Then I guess it would depend on how seriously the assailant takes the threat, or cares for anything more than the objective.