Vote on Trident

Exactly what I believe, Monty.
I love the phrase long term economic sham.

Mhairi Black's speech in parliament outlining why she voted against Trident.

You need to scroll down to get to the video.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/b.marfeel.com/www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/video-snp-mhairi-black-slams-trident-renewal/19/07/%3fmarfeeltn=amp?client=safari#

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/21/margaret-thatcher-officials-plan-cnd-protests-prince-william

The royal family had its uses in Thatcher's time. I wonder what William thinks.
144 Cruise missiles then. We have more missiles now despite them supposedly being part of non proliferation.

I hope May isn't too much like Thatcher.

www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/dec/30/thatcher-cabinet-opposed-trident-purchase

It's all window dressing - empty words that mean nothing.

Interesting that the five states that are part of the NPT have the most warheads.

If only. We have over 200 nuclear warheads with 150 being active. Will washing help, or just pollute the water supply?

If there are still the same number of warheads in stock for the same number of subs, then that isn't reducing the stockpile. but perhaps there will the same number of subs, but fewer warheads in the cupboard (one in use, one in the wash for each sub ?)

But we are supposed to be reducing our stockpile. We committed to stop the spread in 1970. We haven't, so as Caroline Lucas said, why should other countries?

I've answered one of my questions, "The Vanguard class was introduced in 1994 as part of the Trident nuclear programme. The class includes four boats: Vanguard, Victorious, Vigilant and Vengeance"

So they are 22 years old, geriatric in submarine terms.

DJ asked "The vote was on replacing submarines and reducing the stockpile of nuclear weapons. If they have to reduce the number of warheads why do they need to have as many submarines?"

Is it because the existing submarines are out-of-date and about to become obsolete, so replacements will be need for the (reduced number of) warheads?

"replace the current Vanguard Class submarines with four Successor submarines" How many Vanguard submarines are currently in service?

'The Labour leader’s argument is that we have a responsibility to the United Nations, under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to take measures to reduce our nuclear capacity. And that it would show “leadership” to do so.

The UK committed to the NPT at its birth. This treaty, ratified in 1970, aims to “prevent the spread of nuclear weapons” and bring about “complete disarmament” in those countries that already own them.

Therefore, as a signatory to the treaty, the UK should:

pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race

And what better moment than this to ‘negotiate’, when we have a key bargaining chip in our hands?

The UK could make a deal with the remaining nuclear powers to consign Trident to history if they agree to do the same with part of their arsenals. This could trigger a slowing of the arms ‘race’, and would have great symbolic weight as the UK is considered one of the major nuclear powers.'

This is multilateralism, and makes sense.

May would never press the button. America would. She wasn't being quite truthful.

Every PM has to be prepared, if it came to it, to agree to press the button( there is no actual button btw)what would be the point if May or any PM appeared dithery on this question ( it's only a deterrent if we are prepared to use it and publicly say so.)
Corbyn has already said that he wouldn't, therefore negating any deterrent factor ( and one very good reason he could never be the PM).

He is involved in "peace transformation" is he?!

www.thecanary.co/2016/07/18/corbyn-just-blew-missle-sized-hole-right-main-pro-trident-argument/

That wasn't the question she was asked - or answered. The situation wasn't defined in the question, and she certainly didn't say 'If we were under attack...'. It's also worth remembering that the only nuclear attack on a country ever made was by one of our allies. A nuclear attack on us is very unlikely to come from another country, but to come in the form of a small dirty nuclear device planted somewhere.

Because we would be being attacked by nuclear war. No time to discuss things. Those other ways would happen in different scenarios.Not nearly instant annihilation.

What made me gasp was that May didn't give a moments pause when she was asked if she was willing to press the button which would destroy 100,000 people (and the rest). Yet if she'd done the same if asked the same question but about germ warfare, or carpet bombing or any of the other creative ways we have to kill one another, she would have been roundly condemned. Why is Trident different?

I saw The War Game in 1968 at our university Film Soc. Cried a lot and had nightmares for a long time afterwards.
We had the threat of nuclear war right in front of our noses in those days and it was a very real threat.
Personally I am more scared of germ warfare, "dirty" bombs and of course suicide bombing terrorists these days, but plus ça change......

40 BILLION plus 10 BILLION contingency. This will almost certainly be vastly exceeded when the bill finally arrives. And it isn't even ours to fire. Only the USA has that authority.

We could have a modern properly equipped army for that with money left over for other things like a properly funded NHS.

It is the stuff of madness.

I agree absent, and this linked CND article argues that describing Trident as an "independent weapons system" is inaccurate and misleading. One of the final sentences is quite revealing:

"Even the Defence Select Committee recently concluded, in fact, that ‘the only way that Britain is ever likely to use
Trident is to give legitimacy to a US nuclear
attack by participating in it’."

www.cnduk.org/images/stories/briefings/missiledefence/UK_US_reliance.pdf

There are 101 countries in the world who don't have/don't feel the need to have nuclear weapons. These include Germany and Japan and nobody would say they are not important, strong countries.

It's time the UK faced up to the fact that we no longer have an empire and, whilst not totally insignificant, we are just a little island in the Northern Hemisphere. Why does the USA feel we're worthy of a 'special' relationship? Well they can use us as a huge launchpad. Why put themselves at risk by firing their missiles at Russia when they can fire ours and watch us be obliterated by the retaliatory strike.

We're all struggling with the austerity program yet we can spend billions of pounds to have the ability to annihilate millions of innocent people.

While British politicians are desperate to claim that the country "punches above its weight", thus, of course, making them feel globally important, they will still spend vast sums of money to ensure the appropriately named MAD (mutually assured destruction). Of course, the White House and the Pentagon would really be the decision makers in any nuclear scenario.

think-left.org/2015/08/06/seventy-years-of-senselessness/

Definitely need this. In the 60s a film was made called The War Game, which Wilson thought was so horrific that it wasn't allowed to be shown for the next 20 years.

archive.org/details/AV_179-THE_WAR_GAME-_THE_REALITY_OF_NUCLEAR_WAR

They've voted for worse than this as the missiles are much more powerful.

I think the world is a precarious place with nuclear anything,including household fuels.We are selfishly polluting the planet for those who are to follow.I wish there was none of it.
Though I don,t like it,I understand the argument for keeping a deterrent,but wonder as to the wisdom of an out of date one.

Does anyone remember the government advice in the 1960,s during the Cuban crisis?
Whitewash windows to reflect the heat and if you have to go out,wear an overcoat done up to the neck,gloves,stout shoes and a hat/headscarf!!!
Maybe they thought we would need a bit of 'fresh air ' after being cooped up in the homemade shelter under the stairs.
If you were more able,you could make a better shelter in the garden,covered with soil,with a VENTILATION PIPE using wire wool as a filter.