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.
Update: The U.K. House of Commons on Monday voted to renew the Trident nuclear weapons system, 472-117. As the BBC explains, "the MPs' vote approves the manufacture of four replacement submarines at a current estimated cost of £31bn"—though campaigners have put the cost much higher.
"Which part of the non-proliferation treaty do they not understand?" wondered Vicki Hird, campaigns and policy director at War on Want, in a statement after the vote.
"Trident renewal is a reckless and criminal act and any MP voting for it should to be ashamed." "Rather than seeking to waste billions on nuclear weapons, whose use would be illegal under almost every conceivable circumstance and would certainly lead to a huge number of civilian casualties, the U.K. government should make a clear statement for global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, by not renewing the system," she said.
Earlier: Newly installed U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May is prepared to authorize a nuclear strike that could kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
So she said before Parliament on Monday, as the body debated whether to renew Trident, Britain's aging nuclear weapons system.
According to the Independent, May was challenged on her support for the program by the SNP's George Kerevan, who asked: "Are you prepared to authorize a nuclear strike that could kill hundreds of thousands of men, women and children?" May replied with one word: "Yes."
Later, when it was his turn to speak, Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn countered that he "would not take a decision that kills millions of innocent people," saying: "I do not believe the threat of mass murder is a legitimate way to go about international relations."
Meanwhile, wrote Andrew Smith of the Campaign Against Arms Trade on Monday, "even if we put the financial implications to one side, the potential impact of the weapons is far too deadly to contemplate.
One Trident submarine has the power to kill 5.4 million people, and it would do so indiscriminately. The impact could be on an even greater scale than Hiroshima."
Opposition to Trident is widespread in Scotland, where the issue was among several fueling2014's independence campaign. Anti-Trident protests were held in more than 30 Scottish cities, towns, and villages on Saturday, according to The Herald.
originally posted by: ketsuko
Are you assuming that just because she says she's prepared to strike that means she's talking first strike?
originally posted by: ketsuko
Are you assuming that just because she says she's prepared to strike that means she's talking first strike?
originally posted by: NthOther
Probably wise of the Brits to update their "defensive" systems, considering all the neighbors they just pissed off.
And rightly so.
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: ketsuko
Are you assuming that just because she says she's prepared to strike that means she's talking first strike?
Who cares?
They are calling her the Ice Maiden, is that posturing for the perceived enemy? Or narcissistic psychopathic tendency?
They called Thatcher the Iron Lady.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: awareness10
So basically you're saying that in Britain, the PM can just order an attack like that completely unilaterally except in the event of an extreme emergency ... like someone else has already launched on you?
originally posted by: Hazardous1408
originally posted by: ketsuko
Are you assuming that just because she says she's prepared to strike that means she's talking first strike?
Because revenge mass murder is so much more palatable?
Cmon Kets you're smart enough to know that nuking innocent people isn't a good or valid option.
Only to those who disregard life.
Like the sicko Theresa May.
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: awareness10
Oh what, are you really surprised? Is anyone really surprised that the most intolerably tyrannical cow currently to be abroad in high level politics in the UK, responsible for presiding over erosions of our freedoms and liberty by way of mass surveillance, presiding over the creation of the NCA (an organisation that does not need to exist, but will result in less beat officers on my block because there is only a limited number of pounds in the budget) and generally being the worst advert for womanhood since Margaret bloody Thatcher, is doing and saying utterly intolerable things?
I would have been less surprised to wind up dead after strapping myself to a train track at bloody rush hour.