Advanced search

Trident; and NOT getting ‘a bang for our (overly large) bucks’.

(10 Posts)
Isitmebut Thu 09-Apr-15 11:32:43

On the Leaders Debates and in general, I wondered why ‘Foreign Policy’ has not come up (other than those ‘foreigners’ working here) - and then I realised, next to none of them have been anywhere foreign, met anyone – so while they can all say ‘I met a person in my constituency….’, they can’t say ‘I met (name drop) in (wherever)'.

So I was relieved that Trident came up today, as if most of our (enlarged) political elite aren’t on speaking terms with influential foreigners, best we know that we can currently nuke ‘em if it all kicks off. Lol

Seriously though, it is a seriously expensive bit of kit we HOPE we never have to use, but if ‘expense’ was an issue ‘until we could afford it’ we wouldn’t have had any infrastructure, including Crossrail and the planned connecting of the north to south, east to west cities via the High Speed Rail plans.

I understand from the old ‘Ban the Bomb’ marches I witnessed, that this issue still runs deep, as back then many people (especially women) were even camping outside American etc nuclear bases, not just ‘as a day out’, it was often for months.

But who can say that we are not safer today as we had our own nuclear deterrent, when if anyone ‘pressed the button’, it would have been MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction.

Forget the small rogue states developing nuclear bomb technology across the world, we CURRENTLY have a world leader (a sandwich short of a picnic) in Russian President Putin, invading other countries saying “its not me guv” – sitting back and not giving a flying fudge if anyone international cares, or does about it.

When just than man threatens the UK, or even launches missiles at us, WHO is going to threaten/retaliate on our behalf before it is too late - or even after when he says it’s been a mistake, ‘a fat finger’ – France, or a ever more world isolated America who had to be dragged in to help us to oppose tyranny over two previous world wars?

Feb 2015; ”Putin showing UK 'what we are taking on' with Russian bombers, former UK ambassador claims”

”The former British ambassador to Russia has claimed an incident involving two Russian bombers is Vladimir Putin’s way of showing the UK “what we are taking on”.

”Last week, the UK summoned the Russian ambassador to the Foreign Office after two Russian bombers flew over the English Channel, causing disruption to civil aviation.”

”A British government source claimed the incident was being considered "a significant escalation" because Russian aircraft usually confine themselves to flying close to Scotland.”

I can see the point of those that say we can better spend the money paying for a deterrent over 20-30 year instalments (like a bad PFI), but it is somehow reassuring to a little Englander that when Putin bombs us by ‘accident’, we’ll have a few minutes to say our goodbyes to loved ones - as those who would refuse us a nuclear deterrent, gets ‘theirs’ in the first salvo.

Isitmebut Fri 10-Apr-15 00:22:12

P.S. I find it highly worrying that our current Conservative Minister of Defence can lose a two way 'smear' WAR with Ed Miliband, who brazenly tells Conservative mistruths in every speech after what Labour did to the poor over a 10-year spending boom - and IS PROVED to be influenced by those from whom he needs votes e.g. the trade union movement, who's votes BEAT his more Labour MPs and grass roots supported bruv, into 2nd place.

Mr Miliband daily playing the ‘us and them’ card, now accuses” the Conservatives of creating division with us, where there is not division”, which is playing large glass houses and stones.

That nice Sky political reporter Sophie said on Mr Miliband’s reply ‘I have never seen Mr Miliband so animated’, well the subject was ‘smear’, and you’d think that he majored in that subject at the LSE, rather than getting a Master of Science in Economics - based on the lack of detail we have getting on so many economic/financial policies from getting here, to there e.g. ‘we will balance the books over the next parliament’.

As to Mr Fallon, if he is STILL in the defense job after the general election, I suggest that he studies ‘The Art of War’ from another war monger, an old Chinese military general called Sun Tzu – and here are some of General Tzu’s quotes, as Fallons ‘starter for ten’. lol

Isitmebut Mon 20-Apr-15 12:01:55

The recent 5- party debate talked about Trident and UK defence in general, but was a sad tale of mistruths (up to 2010), misplaced criticism of the past 5-years, leading to a Miliband led ‘gang of 4’ high five potential conventional and Trident defence disaster, guaranteed over the next parliament.

Including the SNP, that I believe when Independent, was going to spend a princely £2.5 billion total on protecting their citizens, which would have in air/sea/land forces, bought them what exactly? So we know what will get cut first when the economic stuff hits the fan.

By 2010 and similar to every other Labour government department without budgeting control by 2010, Defence was “not fit for purpose”, as there was a £36 billion plus commitment defence overspend to the annual budget, but as usual, taxpayer money thrown at departments over the noughties years, too often didn’t get to the ‘front line’.

Despite the UK being in perpetual overseas wars under Labour/Blair, our soldiers etc were badly equipped, and in Afghanistan our troops were laughed at by the other forces and called ‘the borrowers’, but then again, as our then defence secretary (Labour’s Dr John Reid who first used “not fit for purpose” taking over the Home Office, had said) and I paraphrase *‘we could go to Afghanistan and come back again, without hardly having fired a shot’, what should our troops expect.

Well the answer is a lot more, as the lack of bullet proofed vests, road vehicles that could withstand roadside bombs, and helicopter to move troops/casualties quickly and safely around the theatre of war, COST MANY OF THEIR LIVES.

So yes under the coalition Defence Spending while fixed at 2% of GDP (when other European countries didn’t) still meant our armed forces numbers shrunk, but like everything else the coalition inherited an over spending mess (where we had more M.O.D. pen pushers than soldiers) and needed to both be restructured and ‘cloth cut’ to our budget, making them better equipped/safer.

*So yes under Labour we had more soldiers (and needed to in a WW1 type numbers game if sending them to war as bomb and Kalashnikov fodder), but until we can afford to in relatively peaceful times and still having a £90 bil 2010 overspend from Labour – surely at the moment we need more homes than bombs?

Trident is essential, but as paid for over 20-30 years it is not an unbearable drain on our national forces, but whether the UK’s defence is conventional, or as a nuclear deterrent, who should the people trust over the next five years and beyond to protect us, our armed forces and get the best value for taxpayers money, a UK parliamentary majority made up of Labour, the SNP and Plaid Cymru, or the Conservatives, based on their RECORD, as well as what they do/don’t say?

Isitmebut Mon 20-Apr-15 12:38:00

P.S, Trying to play ‘the statesman in waiting’ saying in the debate ‘that he stopped Cameron bombing Syria’, was yet another misrepresentation of Conservative policy, where over 6-years he spends most of his time and energy, being clueless what to do over two manifestos other than offer fat government.

The permission Cameron sought from parliament was to have OPTIONS to militarily help the majority Sunni’s getting massacred by Syria Pres. Assad’s minority Shia sect, who were using airplanes, tanks, helicopters with barrel bombs and chemical warfare to KILL them – and also turning them to Sunni ISIS, headquartered in Syria.

But Cameron having a verbal Miliband agreement of support for Syrian action prior to the parliamentary vote, was let down by Miliband both politicking and caving in to his back benchers.

“David Cameron's plans for military action in Syria shot down in dramatic Commons vote”

So play back the 5 party debate and look how smug Miliband the ‘pretender’ was due to his actions, but how many of those below could have been saved, how many of the refugees CURRENTLY trying cross the sea to Europe and dying, are Syrian’s still fleeing from Assad and ISIS in their country, years later – as Miliband tied the UK hands militarily against BOTH?

UN: 9 million Syrians now displaced as conflict ticks into fourth year

“Syrian civil war death toll rises to more than 191,300, according to UN”

blacksunday Mon 20-Apr-15 18:58:28

This is unhealthy.

Isitmebut Tue 21-Apr-15 10:34:09


Do you know I'm sure our soldiers said something similar, being dropped into Afghanistan's Helmand Province without the right kit, having been told by a Labour Defense Minister ' they may not fire a shot' - when they had sooo many (bullets and bombs) coming the other way.

The TRUTH and the past is what we learn from, not making false statements and peddling propaganda to become Prime Minister; to then be responsible for this nations security, our armed forces effectiveness/safety, and our Foreign Policy over the next 5-years or longer.

If you are suggesting that I am offering propaganda, then feel free as I challenge yours, to tell me where I am factually wrong, or points you disagree with.

Spinflight Sat 02-May-15 03:44:44

I don't know what it is, but it scares me..

Not the prospect of nuclear war or whatever it was ranting about... Just the poster...

Isitmebut Sat 02-May-15 21:40:07

Spin-by-name....I thought that UKIP was for Trident, but of course Farage was a Russia-Putin-kiss-arse for his actions in Syria and the Ukraine and.......

Anything to say informative on either, or just trying to diss my opinions, as you wouldn't be the first?

MissMuffetisin Sat 02-May-15 21:46:33

We don't have an independent nuclear deteranttv. The Americans have the launch codes.

Isitmebut Sat 02-May-15 22:57:53

MisMuffetism ... I am intrigued, Trident missiles are on British Subs, right?

What qualified source do you have to suggest that we can't fire our own missiles?

I remember for a while under the last Labour government, John Prescott was in what he called 'the big daddy chair' for a while as Blair and other senior cabinet members were on holiday, so maybe, just maybe fearing an egg fight we parked the codes with the yanks and forgot to ask for them back?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now