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.

 

Brown move to cut UK nuclear subs

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:17 AM
link   
The prime minister is to tell the United Nations that he is willing to cut the UK's fleet of Trident missile-carrying submarines from four to three.

news.bbc.co.uk...

The UK government says it has cut its stockpile of Trident warheads from 200 to 160 but many Labour MPs would like it to scrap the weapons altogether.


--------------------------------------

What the hell!? Why get rid of them?
We need those subs for our own protection, i say we need more, especially with WW3 on our doorstep.




posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Haydn_17
What the hell!? Why get rid of them?
We need those subs for our own protection, i say we need more, especially with WW3 on our doorstep.


Spoken like a true hero!!! We not only need more but if possible better than our enemies. Perhaps we could strive to develope a weapon which is so powerfull it could wipe out an entire country with one blow....or an entire continent. Main thing is that we get more bigger better bombs than our enemies...........

/sarcasm

In other words, you need more fearful weapons to take away your own fear......sounds logical!?!

Peace



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:32 AM
link   
Browns pledge is just money saving ,dressed up as a symbolic gesture on Nuclear proliferation.

we need to scrap the replacement of trident.

If our government is to keep sending our forces into danger,making sure that our troops are kitted out with the best gear and support should be our priority.

How the hell are a few subs, with a couple of nukes going to save us against anything? If WW3 kicks off and its nuclear, we'll all be dead.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by woodwardjnr]



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:33 AM
link   
Right so when the SHTF everyone else has got thousands of nukes and we sitting here with mumbling brown " Oh we got rid ouf ours mumble mumble"

A country with no defense makes for an easy target.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:34 AM
link   
I just don't get the governments sometimes, why announce that he’s going to get rid of one of the submarines that protect our country ... yes enemies we are slightly weaker now, come take advantage ... if anything they should say there getting more not less



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Black Mambo
 


At last somone who agrees, make the enemy think we have a huge fleet of subs, say about 50?



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Black Mambo
I just don't get the governments sometimes, why announce that he’s going to get rid of one of the submarines that protect our country ... yes enemies we are slightly weaker now, come take advantage ... if anything they should say there getting more not less


Name me one country that would plan to attack the UK that any sub will protect us from. considering we have a lot of US Nukes in this country our closest ally, surely thats all the protection we need. we are also in NATO, an attack on a NATO country is an attack on all. These nukes are just for people like you to make them feel the government are keeping them safe.

If a nuclear war kicks off, we all die................



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Haydn_17
 


how shall we pay for this super fleet of subs? we cant even afford 3



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Haydn_17
 


hahaha yeah exactly, why give the impression of weakness??? just don't get it myself lol



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Who says pay? JUST PRETEND we have them.

Thats what the us brits said in WW1.

Oh who would attack the might of the british empire.

THE BLOODY GERMANS DID



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:49 AM
link   
Nuclear subs play an integral role in patrolling our territorial waters and our interests elsewhere, like The Falklands and Antartica etc.

This is just another step in the running down of our Armed Forces that has been ongoing under every Government and administration since, and including, Thatcher.

This once great nation is now incapable of defending itself, a disgraceful state of affairs and we are now reliant on our NATO and EU 'allies'....people who history teaches us not to trust.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Who said i felt safe with old fatty brown running the country? If someone wants to attack the UK nothing is going to stop them but obviously its nice to know that if something does happen we have something to defend ourselves with even if they are old and probably won't fire anyway



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Haydn_17
 

Nuclear missiles are not defense. A couple of subs worth of missles does not add up to MAD. MAD is the only defense, and it isn't.

But I hear you guys are really good at darts. Maybe you could knock down a couple of the incomings with the tridents.

(I know I'm going to catch hell for this, no matter how many winkies I add)



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Haydn_17
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Who says pay? JUST PRETEND we have them.

Thats what the us brits said in WW1.

Oh who would attack the might of the british empire.

THE BLOODY GERMANS DID


I think intelligence agencies across the world have come on a bit since the days of WW1. I don't think we can just pretend we have 50 subs these days.

We don't need to worry about an attack on our Empire, as we don't have one.

Come on mate, if it's not the Muslims your banging on about, now its the GERMANS. is there anyone we shouldn't fear about. Xenophobia and racism are the things that cause divisions, that cause the wars.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


I don't think anyone is specifically worried about The Germans it's just that history teaches us that there is always someone wanting to 'have a go' and it is always wise to be able to defend yourself, something we are incapable of doing at present.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


That would be Mutual assured destruction for those wondering.....

LMAO on the darts......star!!!

Peace



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


I wish you wouldnt take things so literal.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by operation mindcrime
 

Is MAD archaic?
Already?



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


I don't think anyone is specifically worried about The Germans it's just that history teaches us that there is always someone wanting to 'have a go' and it is always wise to be able to defend yourself, something we are incapable of doing at present.


i just believe we have bigger threats to the UK than nuclear attack, which there is no defense against.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


It's military doctrine and not all of us have been part of the military and not all of us have a english/american background. So i thought i would be nice to elucidate.....

Just shoot me......

Peace




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join