Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

UK at war within 1000 days

385 replies

HumbleStumble · 25/10/2026 10:45

Wes Streeting has said Britain must be ready for war in 1,000 days. This combined with the advice to stockpile while you can is highly inflammatory and worrying. AIBU to think that if there is a specific threat he should be specific? If it's a nuclear threat then he should say. We are lucky to have access to what is effectively a bunker but what can you do if you live in a bedsit in the London borough of suburbia?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
lazyarse123 · 25/10/2026 14:08

123H · 25/10/2026 13:33

Timing is everything in politics! It’s no coincidence that, just a few days before the budget, we’ve been told to ‘stock up’ and now to prepare for ‘war in 1000’ days.

With the ‘fear’ factor now placed uppermost in everyone’s minds, the government is preparing us for some sort of tax increase in the budget … to pay for defence.

A cynical, clever ploy🤷‍♀️

Exactly this. They think we're stupid. And then there'll be the power cuts because we don't have the capacity.

fatlouis · 25/10/2026 14:08

Can I come and stay in the bunker? That would be great!

KeefTeef · 25/10/2026 14:08

ColdAsAWitches · 25/10/2026 10:59

Given that he specifically said that the threat to Britain is NOT one of Russian tanks rolling across our borders but terrorism and cyber-war, I don't really see why that's so funny?

He said it's not "simply" what the threat is. Implying that Russian tanks on Hemel Hempstead high Street is indeed the threat, as well as all the other stuff.

savingtheworldafewpostsatatime · 25/10/2026 14:11

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 11:04

Funny how there was a noticeable lull immediately after Ukraine stonked the known bot/troll farms.

How did they do that then?

Dragonscaledaisy · 25/10/2026 14:11

TemperanceWest · 25/10/2026 13:57

I wouldn't be so sure

I'm very sure.

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 14:12

Calliopespa · 25/10/2026 14:04

But the last World War DID involve tanks rolling over borders. He was just distinguishing what modern warfare would look like.

To my knowledge, there were no martian attacks ...

Not the UK's "borders".

There is absolutely no requirement for the SSD to publicly discount the possibility of events which are entirely implausible to begin with. It's mildly comedic, makes him sound ridiculous, and leaves him open to being a figure of fun, none of which you should be able to say about a senior government minister.

He could have made the point succinctly by simply stating that any potential "war" might not necessarily look like historical conflicts or involve military conquest, but instead he chose a poor turn of phrase which isn't applicable or relevant to the UK in any case.

The point about Martians was that he didn't expressly discount that either, presumably because it's just as implausible as Russian tanks doing laps of the M25.

ilovesooty · 25/10/2026 14:12

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Don't be ridiculous.

cryupmykingdom · 25/10/2026 14:12

Ummm, the next General Election is due in 1025 days ? So 1000 days is about when you'd be expected to call an election I guess?

Lemonfrost · 25/10/2026 14:13

RaggedRocks · 25/10/2026 12:15

My grandfather fought in both wars, and was clear with his views on multiculturalism. Enoch Powell spoke for many of that generation.

That's nice dear, Anyway...

Lemonfrost · 25/10/2026 14:16

Livelovebehappy · 25/10/2026 12:27

Nope. Islamist extremists are the greater threat. There’s only so many we can let in before it will create huge problems. They’re determined in their goal, and death doesn’t frighten them. We have people being ushered in who hate women, who hate the way westerners conduct themselves. It’s like a ticking timebomb. Tommy Robinson et al are amateurs in comparison.

Edited

Absolute rubbish.

nevernotmaybe · 25/10/2026 14:16

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 11:00

Because it's an utterly preposterous statement in any context, so he really didn't need to dismiss it to begin with and only made a fool of himself by implying it even could have been a threat at any point in time.

He might as well have mentioned that we're not at risk of flying saucer attack by Martians.

Edited

He was talking about being ready with allies as well, where this can happen. You are just being silly, there was nothing wrong with the statement to anyone with sense. It wasnt literal, just about the concepts of traditional war not applying, and getting ready for new ideas.

The only people to laugh at, is anyone who hears this and can't understand what he means overall and tries to whine about it.

cryupmykingdom · 25/10/2026 14:16

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 14:12

Not the UK's "borders".

There is absolutely no requirement for the SSD to publicly discount the possibility of events which are entirely implausible to begin with. It's mildly comedic, makes him sound ridiculous, and leaves him open to being a figure of fun, none of which you should be able to say about a senior government minister.

He could have made the point succinctly by simply stating that any potential "war" might not necessarily look like historical conflicts or involve military conquest, but instead he chose a poor turn of phrase which isn't applicable or relevant to the UK in any case.

The point about Martians was that he didn't expressly discount that either, presumably because it's just as implausible as Russian tanks doing laps of the M25.

Ahhh, but the tanks could roll over the UK's borders next time!!

I've even heard cries across the border of 'Up With This Sort of Thing!!'

EmmaOfNormandy · 25/10/2026 14:18

User58291 · 25/10/2026 13:45

The Americans are no longer protecting Europe. It's obvious to everyone that we need to spend a lot more on defence.

My reading of the recent Anglo-French nuclear drills was that they explicitly assumed no US assistance and were intended to demonstrate that Europe will deliver a nuclear response regardless of underlying conditions with the UK covering the French, and the French covering the UK.

Presumably not what people like Putin or Trump would really want. Which makes me re-read this thread in a different context now.

Tryagain26 · 25/10/2026 14:19

People are taking individual lines out of context. Read the whole speech before commenting!

EmmaOfNormandy · 25/10/2026 14:22

Tryagain26 · 25/10/2026 14:19

People are taking individual lines out of context. Read the whole speech before commenting!

Spoilsport.

EasternStandard · 25/10/2026 14:24

EmmaOfNormandy · 25/10/2026 14:22

Spoilsport.

There’s no doubt Streeting uses the prospect of war in 1000 days for some political reason. Probably for spending from other departments.

Calliopespa · 25/10/2026 14:24

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 14:12

Not the UK's "borders".

There is absolutely no requirement for the SSD to publicly discount the possibility of events which are entirely implausible to begin with. It's mildly comedic, makes him sound ridiculous, and leaves him open to being a figure of fun, none of which you should be able to say about a senior government minister.

He could have made the point succinctly by simply stating that any potential "war" might not necessarily look like historical conflicts or involve military conquest, but instead he chose a poor turn of phrase which isn't applicable or relevant to the UK in any case.

The point about Martians was that he didn't expressly discount that either, presumably because it's just as implausible as Russian tanks doing laps of the M25.

I think you are being excessively literal about this.

Tanks rolling across borders is imagery, intended to evoke previous conflicts. He wasn't making a factual statement to inform people about tanks. I expect he assumed people would take it as such - not cease stockpiling homemade anti-tank weapons or something.

PigletJohn · 25/10/2026 14:26

overnightangel · 25/10/2026 11:02

The greatest danger to national security in this country is already here and seemingly being continually welcomed with open arms

The Blackshirts in their balaclavas are not being widely welcomed.

somanychristmaslights · 25/10/2026 14:27

Where have you been?? The treat is from Russia, there’s nothing new to tell us.

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 14:28

EmmaOfNormandy · 25/10/2026 14:18

My reading of the recent Anglo-French nuclear drills was that they explicitly assumed no US assistance and were intended to demonstrate that Europe will deliver a nuclear response regardless of underlying conditions with the UK covering the French, and the French covering the UK.

Presumably not what people like Putin or Trump would really want. Which makes me re-read this thread in a different context now.

Trump's whinging about certain NATO members neglecting their own commitment and hiding behind the US is not entirely without foundation, but what he appears to be too simple-minded to grasp, is that by undermining NATO with his constant slandering of it and it's constituent members, by the constant threats to cave the entire thing in, by threatening supposed US allies, by making it clear that he'll throw friendly nations to the dogs if it suits him, he just emboldens the US's actual enemies by weakening the cohesiveness of their opponents in turn. It's dramatically short-sighted, and I can only put it down to two things, namely, the man's inherent lack of intelligence, and the fact that he'll happily cosy up to the US's genuine enemies if he believes it's beneficial for his own personal wealth and his electoral prospects. Shouldn't put down to malevolence what is adequately explained by stupidity, but with Trump it's easy to see why there is a perception that he is in fact an active agent of Putin's.

A diminished, fragmented Europe just strengthens the world position and power of the likes of Russia and China, which ultimately makes them more able to stand up to the US and diminishes the US's standing and power in turn, yet he either can not see this, or simply does not care because personal enrichment is his only preoccupation.

110APiccadilly · 25/10/2026 14:28

Ideally, we'd be ready for war (in the sense of having an army, navy, air force, etc plus reserves and plans/ capacity for training more people/ building more weaponry/ feeding the nation) at all times. Otherwise I question what the point of the MOD is.

However, Streeting has given himself three years, which means, in classic politician style, that it will probably be someone else's problem by then.

Bluelake · 25/10/2026 14:29

As Portmore mentioned, I think it's about us getting more resilient individually and as a country. We live in a forever changing world, none of us know exactly when something immediate will go wrong or might not even see it coming if we've heard about things on the move.

Crunchymum · 25/10/2026 14:30

@HumbleStumble

Interested to hear more about this bunker you have access to.

How? Why? So many questions!!

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 14:32

Calliopespa · 25/10/2026 14:24

I think you are being excessively literal about this.

Tanks rolling across borders is imagery, intended to evoke previous conflicts. He wasn't making a factual statement to inform people about tanks. I expect he assumed people would take it as such - not cease stockpiling homemade anti-tank weapons or something.

Perhaps I am being excessively literal, but IMO the problem here is we have the SSD talking about the vitally important matter of national security, the threat of conflict, what the threats are and what form they take, so he damn well ought to be entirely literal and succinct himself.

Dontcallmescarface · 25/10/2026 14:36

Crunchymum · 25/10/2026 14:30

@HumbleStumble

Interested to hear more about this bunker you have access to.

How? Why? So many questions!!

We have a bunker in our village. A proper concrete one with a steel door. The owner posted on the village Facebook page that he's never had so many "friend requests" in such a short space of time as he's had over the last 2 weeks.