Trident failure

You're right Granny23 the National Interest has nothing to do with the interests of the people.

I am surprised that no one has mentioned this 40 year old 'secret' which has just come to light today:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-38744322

It all leaves us wondering how many accidents and near misses have happened where reports have been buried 'in the National Interest'. I suspect that this National Interest is not, as you might expect for the good of the people, unless the powers that be think we will worry unnecessarily about such dangers and want to save us that worry (Aye Right!). It cannot be that they do not want the Russians to know what has happened as the Russian Hierarchy will be better informed about such incidents than we are. No - the obvious conclusion is that we must be kept in the dark, lest we, as stake holders, withdraw monetary support from the whole project and collectively demand the removal of these dangerous WMD from our land and shores.

There is an impression that some in the UK Government think that Trident isn't a threat to them as it's close to Scotland's biggest concentration of population, not anyone important. (Cynical, moi?)

Lord West, the former head of the Navy and a former security minister, said that it was pointless for the Government to refuse to say when the failed test took place. If he wanted to know, he could just phone Mr Putin, who would be able to tell him as the Russians monitor what our submarines are doing both from ships and from space.

Please consider joining CND/SCND to push for getting rid of these dreadful weapons.

If we feel it's OK to kill millions of innocent people we should at least know our pounds are being well spent on weapons that will actually achieve their objective

Welshwife, would you rather not know that billions of pounds are being spent on WMD that may not even work.

I think some people are suggesting that as it malfunctioned that demonstrates that it is dated and should be renewed.

My view is that if it incorrectly or correctly hits its target, or if it is accidentally activitated, all outcomes are awful and so I am just against having it at all.

As they report their "successful" trials then presumably they should report their "unsuccessful" ones.

If she's got any political acumen now's the chance to put a hold on Trident until a full report is out on this incident. That should see out her government and put the onus on the next/her successor to decide

Anya I agree. That's what a sensible person would do. Do you think Mrs May reads GN? She should!

Apparently this was only the fifth time Trident had been tested. Fifth. It cost so many millions each time it's fired we just can't afford it. So we have a missile we can't use or the other side will obliterate our little island, costs far more than we can afford to make - or test properly, and will probably be obsolete by the time we can afford to actually get it. How silly is that.

Well, now we know, roses, who do you suggest should be the next Minister for Defence to go aboard the nuclear sub when it has its next test?
I can't imagine they'll be queuing up to be the next minister.
2020, the next test.
After they have been tested, they then return to Scotland to be armed with warheads. I am sure they would feel much happier if they knew the missiles worked properly.

Welshwife, we had French Exocet missiles before Trident. The French wanted the UK and France to cooperate again in the future. Can't see much chance of that now.

I think this obsession with transparency can be a dangerous thing when too many statistics are made public. Do countries like Russia publish these figures?

Does any other country publicly say when a test of this kind goes wrong? Surely it's something to keep quiet to the world about, why make a big announcement?
The military will have told the PM, and why should it go any further?Before somebody says 'transparency' how is it in the general public's interest to know, and if the whole of Parliament is told, then the workd knows too.
This missile wasn't armed, it was a test.
It made no difference to MP's who were deciding to keep/not keep Trident.
Your post at 19.15.16 djen is what exactly, a bad joke?

Or Mexico.

Maybe this is really part of a deep dark plan to stop Trump pushing the button, because he can't be sure where any missile will finish up. Might be Russia, might be Florida- oh Hell! he'd probably rather it was Florida!!!

We have tested the Trident since 1994, eight tests in all.
Every other test has been reported, including one in 2012.
Every test there was someone from the ministry or department of defence on board.
Minister for defence in 2012 was Philip Hammond. When that test happened, Michael Fallon was secretary of state for business.
He must have known that the ministry of defence put out a press statement then.

As I said before, they have told us every time it went right, but not when it went wrong. That cannot be acceptable.

Mind you the self destruct button worked correctly when the engaged that - so not a total failure. I wonder if they have ever needed to fire that for real before.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2017/01/23/commons-speaker-john-bercow-calls-michael-fallon-stupid-in-trident-row-julian-lewis_n_14341704.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

The speaker is leaving soon anyway.

If there's a one in a hundred chance of something going wrong, it doesn't mean that it won't go wrong twice in a row.

Are you saying it's okay for them to tell us every time it goes right, which they do, but not when it goes wrong? So much for open government.

dj your post 19.15?!

Tested every four years, and on The Daily Politics it was said that there have been over a hundred testings, so one failed unarmed missile isn't bad going.
Even if Parliament had been told before the the vote it wouldn't have made any difference...you either believe that we should have nuclear missiles or you don't.
It was decided that we do.

Michael Fallon;
The Trident test was an operational success ..... but you might want to rethink your holiday plans.

Theresa May;
Of course I'd kill 100,000 people.....and I'm not too fussy which 100,000 people.

Thanks, vampirequeen, but I'd really rather not.

"During the debate on the renewal of the Trident system last July, Theresa May said that she would be willing to 'press the nuclear button' to launch a missile that would kill 100,000 people. What she omitted to tell MPs - and the public - is that those 100,000 people might well have been you or me, given that she knew beyond doubt, because it had just happened, that Trident could simply veer off course, then explode somewhere other than it was meant to, if the auto-destruct should fail.

While the media got its knickers in a twist about Corbyn's honest answer that he would not 'press the button', Mrs May was busy hiding undeniably relevant facts from Parliament and from the British people.

Which is all very illuminating about the mores of Tory politicians and the UK's media. Not quite as illuminating as a nuclear flash, though.

Oops, sorry Florida."

Don't want to be in May's head either.
Real 1984, Airstrip one, isn't it, as you said.
I got laughed at for saying that on another thread. Perhaps we'd better not think about what might happen, just in case.... Much better to bury our heads in the sand. Keep the television off and the radio off, so we can't hear the four minute warning.
Just listening to Spicer at the moment. He has such a boring voice, I'm surprised most of the press corps aren't asleep already.

Even if you believe in the concept of muscle flexing and MAD it doesn't make sense that we have to pay for it when the USA have control of the button. We're paying for the privilege of being on the front line.

Put yourself in Trump's head brain. Come it's not hard. There is isn't much there because his second, much larger brain, is in his groin. 'Hmmm,' he thinks to himself, 'I have two choices. First of all (remember he speaks American), I could attack the enemy with the nukes in North and South Dakota but that would mean the enemy would fire back at the good 'ol US of A. Bummer that doesn't sound good. The enemy might attack Washington and I'm here. Second of all (remember American speak), I could fire off the Brit's missiles. Then the enemy will attack them. Serves them right for founding this great country in the first place then daring to try to tax us.

Result. Great Britain is bombed to oblivion. A few enemy cities are bombed to oblivion but not the capital city because we want to be able to draw up a treaty before the US is at real risk. Shame about the Brits but collateral damage is the price we pay for keeping the USA free.

The Americans are allowed to know about it, but not us. Michael Fallon has refused to say what happened.

edition.cnn.com/2017/01/23/europe/trident-missile-failure-theresa-may/index.html
He's making it worse for May, not better.

The head of GCHQ has stood down.
A coincidence?

Julian Lewis, the Tory chair of the defence committee, called for somebody to be sacked over the controversy.

Lewis told broadcasters: “This sort of event is not one you can play both ways. These tests are routine but infrequent in this country. Whenever they work, which is 99% of the time, film is released of them working, so whichever person decided they wanted to draw a veil over one that didn’t work should have been sacked. You have always got to assume that something like this will come out.

“This test went wrong in June when it was a question of David Cameron and his team being at No 10. They evidently decided to cover this matter up.

“The only way she could have disclosed this matter would have been to point the finger of accusation against her predecessor for covering it up. So a tricky situation, but on the whole I think if she did know – which she probably did – she should have spoken up.”

I assume Julian Lewis is on her side, usually, but not in this.

Can it even be called a 'deterrent' when you can't be certain which way it will go if you fire it? Watch out we have our weapons aimed at you! (but actually it might go the other way so everyone should take cover!)