You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
UK vote to renew Trident Nuclear Deterrent
Posted:
UK vote to renew Trident Nuclear DeterrentPosted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 04, 201013Year Member
Posts: 6,598
Reputation Power: 276
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 04, 201013Year Member
Posts: 6,598
Reputation Power: 276
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
The UK Government have just voted in favour of renewing the nations Nuclear Defence by a vote of 472 to 117, a vast majority.
What is Trident?
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
The UK Government have just voted in favour of renewing the nations Nuclear Defence by a vote of 472 to 117, a vast majority.
What is Trident?
British submarines carrying Trident Nuclear Weapons (Warheads), they have always been on patrol, gliding silently beneath the waves, somewhere in the world's oceans.
The logic is to deter a nuclear attack on the UK because, even if the nation's conventional defence capabilities were destroyed, the silent submarine would still be able to launch a catastrophic retaliatory strike on the aggressor, a concept known as mutually assured destruction.
The submarines carry up to eight Trident missiles. Each can be fitted with a number of warheads, which can be directed at different targets.
Each of the four submarines carries a sealed "letter of last resort" in the prime minister's hand, containing instructions to follow if the UK has been devastated by a nuclear strike and the government annihilated.
It's expected to cost in excess of £31bn to fully renew and upgrade
The logic is to deter a nuclear attack on the UK because, even if the nation's conventional defence capabilities were destroyed, the silent submarine would still be able to launch a catastrophic retaliatory strike on the aggressor, a concept known as mutually assured destruction.
The submarines carry up to eight Trident missiles. Each can be fitted with a number of warheads, which can be directed at different targets.
Each of the four submarines carries a sealed "letter of last resort" in the prime minister's hand, containing instructions to follow if the UK has been devastated by a nuclear strike and the government annihilated.
It's expected to cost in excess of £31bn to fully renew and upgrade
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
The following 1 user thanked Vancouver_Canucks for this useful post:
Speedom (07-21-2016)
#2. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: May 06, 200914Year Member
Posts: 761
Reputation Power: 167
I'm happy to know we have it if we ever need it then not have it and regret it
- 2useful
- 0not useful
#3. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 02, 20167Year Member
Posts: 10
Reputation Power: 0
Well as a serving RN rating, I was obviously happy it was renewed.
Anyway, I was glad they did, it secures our stand in the world and secures our people.
Not many people agree however, they believe it costed too much, £200 Billion is alot, I agree, but this is 80 Mil people lives at stake. Some people believed we should cut it and fund the NHS. I hated that reason personally, not because I hate the NHS, it's one of Britain's greatest attributes, but throughout our budget, the NHS receives more funding then our ENTIRE defense budget does, it didn't make any sense
More people mentioned "so you would kill thousands at a push of a button"
2 things
1 - I know for a fact it's not just a easy mistake of pressing a button, it's not like in cartoons
2- The system is a deterrent 1st, and a weapon 2nd. We have had 70 years proof of that. I cannot understand what more people want? Nothing scares people more than the threat of death, what doesn't deter people is the question "I dare you".
Put it another way, despite our limited relations, we aren't exactly friends with Russia.
So to conclusion, I'm happy we have renewed it, you will find the people who didn't do not possess the experience or knowledge of relations between countries, I do, it's part of my job. Just because the trident system doesn't deal with the terror threat, doesn't mean it should be scrapped, because it then opens up threats from countries with a military power, you have to ask, what would be the point?
Anyway, I was glad they did, it secures our stand in the world and secures our people.
Not many people agree however, they believe it costed too much, £200 Billion is alot, I agree, but this is 80 Mil people lives at stake. Some people believed we should cut it and fund the NHS. I hated that reason personally, not because I hate the NHS, it's one of Britain's greatest attributes, but throughout our budget, the NHS receives more funding then our ENTIRE defense budget does, it didn't make any sense
More people mentioned "so you would kill thousands at a push of a button"
2 things
1 - I know for a fact it's not just a easy mistake of pressing a button, it's not like in cartoons
2- The system is a deterrent 1st, and a weapon 2nd. We have had 70 years proof of that. I cannot understand what more people want? Nothing scares people more than the threat of death, what doesn't deter people is the question "I dare you".
Put it another way, despite our limited relations, we aren't exactly friends with Russia.
So to conclusion, I'm happy we have renewed it, you will find the people who didn't do not possess the experience or knowledge of relations between countries, I do, it's part of my job. Just because the trident system doesn't deal with the terror threat, doesn't mean it should be scrapped, because it then opens up threats from countries with a military power, you have to ask, what would be the point?
- 2useful
- 0not useful
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.