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
Mumblechum0 · 25/10/2026 11:36

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

Agree 💯

LivingDeadGirlUK · 25/10/2026 11:36

overnightangel · 25/10/2026 11:13

What religion or ideology is responsible for most of the terrorist attacks here in the last 20-25 years? This is readily available information.

It's a good job you picked 20-25 years and not 50, or the answer would have been Catholic.

Brickafterbrick888 · 25/10/2026 11:37

I think this is about the upcoming budget as much as anything else!

shuggles · 25/10/2026 11:37

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 11:35

The last successful amphibious invasion of the UK took place in the 11th century. No tanks back then. It hasn't happened since because it's a practical impossibility. The UK only survived the conflict with Nazi Germany because it is an island, and in 1940 the Nazis had total and unhindered control of all the nearest land masses to the UK, so if they were unable to do it then, there is absolutely no prospect of Russia being able to do anything similar when their nearest launch point is 1500km away.

My post was not about the feasibility of an amphibious assault on the UK.

It was simply to point out that the wording about "Russian tanks rolling across UK borders" is not invalid.

Sugarleaf · 25/10/2026 11:38

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 11:04

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

100%. All these types of threads stopped when the Russian data centre was destroyed. Now, they’re back with a vengeance.

So many over the last few days suggesting we stop supporting Ukraine in case Russia attacks us.

I really think MN need to police this as disinformation/ misinformation and propaganda is literally one of the ways we are being attacked by Russia.

This is the war. Right now

Æthelred · 25/10/2026 11:38

Attictroll · 25/10/2026 11:02

1000 days is about 3 years so not panicking today. The nutters of Trump, putin and tech advances mean wise to prep but its three years so mid range prediction…

I wish no ill on Trump or Putin but I hope both men are resting peacefully by then.

EmmaOfNormandy · 25/10/2026 11:38

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

I could not agree more. Everyone is rushing to use AI with no thought as to the consequences.

overnightangel · 25/10/2026 11:39

Lemonfrost · 25/10/2026 11:29

You really might want to consider taking your unpleasant views elsewhere. No religion advocates for terrorism.

Is it an unpleasant view or an inconvenient truth?

Sugarleaf · 25/10/2026 11:39

Lemonfrost · 25/10/2026 11:05

What's that then? Do tell us.

I assumed they meant AI!

MoistVonL · 25/10/2026 11:39

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 11:04

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

There wasn't! That's been thoroughly debunked by More Or Less.

RaggedRocks · 25/10/2026 11:39

shuggles · 25/10/2026 11:37

My post was not about the feasibility of an amphibious assault on the UK.

It was simply to point out that the wording about "Russian tanks rolling across UK borders" is not invalid.

The UK is being invaded every day by amphibious means. Labour can't stop the dinghies, how are they going to stop the Russian tanks?

overnightangel · 25/10/2026 11:40

LivingDeadGirlUK · 25/10/2026 11:36

It's a good job you picked 20-25 years and not 50, or the answer would have been Catholic.

Pointing out that I’m focussing on the present day problem isn’t the gotcha you think it is

SnowFrogJelly · 25/10/2026 11:41

What are these serious threats within our borders

Lunalara · 25/10/2026 11:41

I am getting fed up of these warnings. It is obviously important to prepare, but this one in particular grates me. How on earth will we know who is in charge by then?

ilovesooty · 25/10/2026 11:42

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

Here we go again 🙄

EasternStandard · 25/10/2026 11:43

MoistVonL · 25/10/2026 11:39

There wasn't! That's been thoroughly debunked by More Or Less.

Fair. Just had a look and you’re right, that misinformation travelled pretty fast.

Vaxtable · 25/10/2026 11:43

this post is exactly why people need to do some investigating themselves before posting. News outlets pick and choose and take the points that will give the most headlines. It’s not until you look at the wider picture, read what they are saying in context and do that investigation that you get the actual picture

what was said is in @TemperanceWest post and puts a completely different picture in place

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 11:43

shuggles · 25/10/2026 11:37

My post was not about the feasibility of an amphibious assault on the UK.

It was simply to point out that the wording about "Russian tanks rolling across UK borders" is not invalid.

Of course it is. It's sheer nonsense. The UK does not have any "borders" any prospective invasion force could "roll tanks across" to begin with, unless you are talking about maritime borders, in which case the vehicles in question would be ships and not tanks, or the UK's internal borders between the constituent nations. In the latter case the presence of foreign AFV's on UK soil would suggest the UK is not actively at war, but has already lost the ability to defend itself and capitulated to occupation/annexation, and that still wouldn't be as a result of an actual boots-on-ground invasion. We'd have been nuked, surrendered, and then occupied via disembarkment at UK ports.

Sugarleaf · 25/10/2026 11:44

MoistVonL · 25/10/2026 11:39

There wasn't! That's been thoroughly debunked by More Or Less.

Can you link this please I want to read it

CinnamonJellyBeans · 25/10/2026 11:44

The danger comes from within.

We are at increased risk of short-term shortages/power cuts/loss of infrastructure, due to cyber attacks.

I think the government wants to ensure that we have several day's worth of vital supplies, like batteries, tinned goods, bottled water, toilet roll to stop reform supporters/Britain first/whatever they call themselves now raiding/attacking/looting high street convenience stores that are owned/run/staffed by anyone with brown faces.

Sounds ridiculous, but after four days without vapes, monster cans and crisps (or whatever they subsist on), they will drum up support, don balaclavas, burn some wheelie bins and go out to take back their white sliced loaves and coke zero.

Then the nation will erupt.

celeriacismisunderstood · 25/10/2026 11:44

He didn’t say that though, did he?

He said we will be ready for war in 1000 days. Which is late and will should be ready if not yesterday, then now, because being ready for war is the only thing that guarantees peace.

Undones · 25/10/2026 11:45

I dont care war or no war if it happens it happens if it dont it dont.

Gengha · 25/10/2026 11:45

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 11:31

It's isn't Ukraine in isolation, it's Ukraine being propped up with an enormous amount of logistical, financial, materiel, intelligence, and technical support from most of Europe and beyond.

Without that Ukraine would have collapsed in weeks even considering the amateurish misadventures of the Russian military.

The reality is not so much Ukraine comfortably holding off Russia as it is Russia still managing to prosecute a war against most of the rest of the Democratic world, only it's taking place entirely in Ukraine and it's overwhelmingly Ukrainian lives paying the price.

Once this is resolved, all Russia has to do to completely destroy NATO as a going concern is snip off and hold a small part of Estonia or Latvia, and then they'll be free to do the same to practically any other European Nation near their border as they have to Ukraine, only chances are that nation, Finland for example, is going to be far less able to resist Russian aggression simply because it's nowhere near the size of Ukraine and poses nothing like the same logistical issues.

This is why it's of utmost importance to ensure Russia loses this current fight. It isn't just about protecting Ukraine, it's also about diminishing Putin to the point whereby even his own supporters lose confidence and would not countenance another military misadventure.

Of course

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 25/10/2026 11:45

RaggedRocks · 25/10/2026 11:39

The UK is being invaded every day by amphibious means. Labour can't stop the dinghies, how are they going to stop the Russian tanks?

You can't possibly be this ignorant and stupid, therefore you are clearly at the wind-up.

EmmaOfNormandy · 25/10/2026 11:45

this post is exactly why people need to do some investigating themselves before posting.

But they are. GB News, The Telegraph, The Express are are all mined for each and every semi colon comma, and (especially) use of white space.