It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Nukes Could Be Deployed to UK to Target Russia

page: 2
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Once again the UK government is being a puppet to the US just like it did when Blair went to war over the so called Wmd's. This had always been the problem with the UK government, trying to please it's US counterpart.

US nukes in the UK would definitely be seen as a threat to Russia and will escalate the situation further. As I understand it, NATO is supposedly a defensive organisation and will only attack if a member of NATO is attacked. Then why the transfer of nukes into UK?




posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:40 PM
link   
The US got away with nuking a country once . Had Japan had the ability to nuke back then the US would have never done it and any sane person living on this planet would not do it . If the US is so big on missal defense then let them sell it to the ones that are too scared to think properly . Russia has nothing to fear from my part of the world so I couldn't imagine Russia having their guns pointing at me . Now if my Govt. decided it would be a good idea to point nukes at Russia then I could expect that they would have stuff aimed at me .

Russia is not about to back down from threats . They have no position to back away from .This is just western msm porn .



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tranceopticalinclined
Anything involving nukes isn't just a bad idea, it's an act of war.

Russia's people aren't doing what putin is doing, putin is doing what putin is doing, so why nuke russia? Why not hire hitman or plan a assassination.


If we wanted to nuke Russia, the ones that hit would come from submarines.

Stationing nukes in Britain is a threat that says to Putin, you will have to wipe out England if you use your nukes, you cannot get away with a limited use in bumfk nowhereville Ukraine. This means all of Russia gets annihilated in retaliation if he uses any nukes. Sorry Brits but you are the fodder if Putin decides to go full Adolph Hitler.

It ups the ante making it harder for Putin to think a first strike would go unanswered.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tranceopticalinclined
Anything involving nukes isn't just a bad idea, it's an act of war.

Russia's people aren't doing what putin is doing, putin is doing what putin is doing, so why nuke russia? Why not hire hitman or plan a assassination.


Maybe someone with a two for one sale? The US has lots of Mercs and CIA that are way off the reservation. Not that I would want to see Putin ended as I kinda appreciate his position.

Ahhhhh, to be 30 years younger again...

Cheers - Dave



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   
what a clever move! it says "we like to escalate!" and "let's poke russia more!" at the same time!

sorry, but if there is a juvenile bully constantly shouting "come at me bro!" and who pisses everyone off right now, it's the west.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined

There are many, many Russians who adore Putin and hang on his every word. Don't be so quick to discount their roles in Putin's decisions.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   
You got a president who doesn’t have the spine to fight ISIS but he is fiddling around with nuclear war?


It doesn’t add up



Obama seems to be a total puppet and taking orders like a waiter



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Tranceopticalinclined
Anything involving nukes isn't just a bad idea, it's an act of war.

Russia's people aren't doing what putin is doing, putin is doing what putin is doing, so why nuke russia? Why not hire hitman or plan a assassination.


If we wanted to nuke Russia, the ones that hit would come from submarines.

Stationing nukes in Britain is a threat that says to Putin, you will have to wipe out England if you use your nukes, you cannot get away with a limited use in bumfk nowhereville Ukraine. This means all of Russia gets annihilated in retaliation if he uses any nukes. Sorry Brits but you are the fodder if Putin decides to go full Adolph Hitler.

It ups the ante making it harder for Putin to think a first strike would go unanswered.


I often wonder, when I read posts like this, if the person who posted it has absolutely any idea of the import of the argument. It is clear that you do not sir. I also wonder other things best left unsaid.
Sorry Brits but...! WTF? It is this attitude that garners anti US feeling in the world, this whole fast and loose attitude with other people's lives.

Sickening.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Jonjonj

Unfortunately yes. Tinfoil here is a perfect example of a true stereotype.

I promise you all Americans do not think like animals like this. I would want nobody to be fodder for anybody. But if war were to happen with Russia the US would deserve the striles way mote than London.

So here is an American praying this does not happen. Putin will not nuke anybody. Only my country pulls # like that.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   
NO, just no...I will personally go to London and throw the first punch (should I get the chance).

Anyway, why move them to the UK when the USA is closer to Russia?? (It is isn't it?)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jonjonj

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Tranceopticalinclined
Anything involving nukes isn't just a bad idea, it's an act of war.

Russia's people aren't doing what putin is doing, putin is doing what putin is doing, so why nuke russia? Why not hire hitman or plan a assassination.


If we wanted to nuke Russia, the ones that hit would come from submarines.

Stationing nukes in Britain is a threat that says to Putin, you will have to wipe out England if you use your nukes, you cannot get away with a limited use in bumfk nowhereville Ukraine. This means all of Russia gets annihilated in retaliation if he uses any nukes. Sorry Brits but you are the fodder if Putin decides to go full Adolph Hitler.

It ups the ante making it harder for Putin to think a first strike would go unanswered.


I often wonder, when I read posts like this, if the person who posted it has absolutely any idea of the import of the argument. It is clear that you do not sir. I also wonder other things best left unsaid.
Sorry Brits but...! WTF? It is this attitude that garners anti US feeling in the world, this whole fast and loose attitude with other people's lives.

Sickening.


Be sorry for yourself. It is not Americans proposing this in the story it is Brits proposing to ask America to deploy nukes on their soil.

You just exercised an unfounded excuse to bash on America, congratulations.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Well, since the UK already has a nuclear deterrent with nuclear missiles on subs and stockpiled warheads it is a moot point. If having B2B's using bases in England which was developed to carry nuclear weapons into Russia isn't a clue that in the case of a nuclear exchange the UK would be hit anyway from Russia then what difference would it make? I don't see the need to move any warheads anywhere. There is enough deployed and on alert that if it goes down the world will be toast anyway. The only possible survival areas will be in the Southern Hemisphere. There is more destructive power on one Ohio class submarine that used in both World Wars. And Britian and the US have those deployed, That doesn't even account for the rest of the force.

Russia flat out stated that if they were attacked with US conventional weapons then they would respond with nukes. They do not have the capability that the US has. The whole war issue is insanity at its worse when dealing with what is deployed the world over. I still don't see why the UK would be concerned either way since they are a targeted nation by Russia and have nuclear missiles and other warheads.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: woogleuk
NO, just no...I will personally go to London and throw the first punch (should I get the chance).

Anyway, why move them to the UK when the USA is closer to Russia?? (It is isn't it?)


Bwahahahahaha! Go check a map there! Why do you care when they have them anyway.


edit on 10/6/15 by spirit_horse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Here is the pdf on Britian's nuclear warhead stockpile if anyone is interested
ETA: Apparently British call their Ohio Class nuclear subs Vanguard. They have the nuclear missiles aboard for the deterrent.


edit on 10/6/15 by spirit_horse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

“We would look at the case. We work extremely closely with the Americans.”

“That would be a decision that we would make together if that proposition was on the table.”

“We would look at all the pros and the cons and come to a conclusion.”

Which part of this says UK asking US for nuclear weapons?



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: lightedhype
a reply to: Jonjonj

Unfortunately yes. Tinfoil here is a perfect example of a true stereotype.

I promise you all Americans do not think like animals like this. I would want nobody to be fodder for anybody. But if war were to happen with Russia the US would deserve the striles way mote than London.

So here is an American praying this does not happen. Putin will not nuke anybody. Only my country pulls # like that.


This applies equally to your post.

It is not Americans proposing this in the story it is Brits proposing to ask America to deploy nukes on their soil.

You just exercised an unfounded excuse to bash on America, congratulations.


As for personal attacks, thanks but my sound argument does not need to take your bait. Your country didn't pull anything in this story, Britain is weighing the option of asking the US to deploy nukes on their own land because they know there was discussion of America tearing up the treaty to not deploy tactical nukes in Europe that Reagan and Gorbachev signed because Putin already has torn that treaty up by deploying tactical nukes in Crimea. Reading comprehension is a skill worth exercising.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: spirit_horse

I care because I, as a British citizen, do not want US WMD's in my home country.

And I did check a map, looks like the USA is far closer to Russia than the UK, the USA is only 60 miles from Russia, the UK is 1100 miles.
edit on 10/6/15 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: TinfoilTP

“We would look at the case. We work extremely closely with the Americans.”

“That would be a decision that we would make together if that proposition was on the table.”

“We would look at all the pros and the cons and come to a conclusion.”

Which part of this says UK asking US for nuclear weapons?








The US cannot just deploy nukes in Britain when they want, Britain would have to ask the US to. His discussion was clearly on that decision making process.

edit on 10-6-2015 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

No, the UK and the US are considering the strategic option of the UK hosting more nuclear weapons, a decision which would have to be agreed to, and would be a joint decision.
Don't bother replying again, my reading skills are fine, they are offended by reading badly written tosh though.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tranceopticalinclined


Russia's people aren't doing what putin is doing, putin is doing what putin is doing, so why nuke russia? Why not hire hitman or plan a assassination.


Hmmm who would you use for said assassination. Can't use the US in all honesty. They have a terrible track record of any mission oriented goal. Take for example the last 9 rescue attempts they have made to get back hostages....ALL failed. The US has a great military numbers wise and for battle as a whole but covert missions against someone like Putin will only end in failure.

Maybe the UK could have MI6 and the SAS do it but apart from that not a good idea.

Then again nor is nuclear weaponry




top topics



 
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join