Trident
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:37:03 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Trident
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Should the U.K replace Trident?
#1
Yes
 
#2
Yes, but only half of it
 
#3
No, replace with cheaper system
 
#4
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 20

Author Topic: Trident  (Read 5345 times)
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 01, 2006, 02:20:00 PM »

The nuclear issue is slowly seeping back into the news. A vote in the Commons on the issue is likely next year; it'll be interesting to see how many Unilateralists there are in the current PLP.

(I vote No, btw).
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2006, 02:31:38 PM »

And I voted Yes

Dave
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2006, 02:50:40 PM »

We're talking about Trident SLBMs right (D-5s)?

What exactly is the protocol if you guys needed to use them...could you fire them on your own or do you need our permission (which seems on the surface, kinda like a crappy deal for you)
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 01, 2006, 02:56:52 PM »

We're talking about Trident SLBMs right (D-5s)?

Er... the nuke things. I don't know about the letters and numbers because I'm not obsessed with things that are designed kill a lot of people.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2006, 03:05:56 PM »

We're talking about Trident SLBMs right (D-5s)?

Er... the nuke things. I don't know about the letters and numbers because I'm not obsessed with things that are designed kill a lot of people.



Well..SLBM=Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile...D-5 being the revision/model...blah blah blah...I was a real nerd as a child.

Sorry about the terminology, I figured it might clarify my question.

Do either you know what the protocol is for release of your sub missiles? Do you have to ask our permission since I think we technically loan you the actual missile?
Logged
KEmperor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,454
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2006, 03:18:03 PM »

We're talking about Trident SLBMs right (D-5s)?

Er... the nuke things. I don't know about the letters and numbers because I'm not obsessed with things that are designed kill a lot of people.


Well, you are obsessed with politics.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 01, 2006, 03:18:39 PM »

Well..SLBM=Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile...

Submarine? Yes then.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh don't worry, it shows Tongue

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. But something mentioned in the debate is "independent nuclear deterrent".
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2006, 03:27:25 PM »

Well..SLBM=Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile...

Submarine? Yes then.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh don't worry, it shows Tongue

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. But something mentioned in the debate is "independent nuclear deterrent".


Wouldn't that be an interesting conversation...blair/brown/cameron calling GWB at 1am (since W goes to bed around 9) asking W if they can use the missile.

dear lord...
Logged
merseysider
militant centrist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 524


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2006, 05:07:13 PM »

RENEW TRIDENT!

Hearing Labour backbenchers on Radio 4 saying that we should, in effect, implement unilateral nuclear disarmament, is like an old horror movie where an ancient mummy comes back to life, climbs out of its sarcophagus and starts walking around terrifying everybody.

It really pains me sometimes to see how, despite twelve years of New Labour and the Blair revolution, that the unreconstructed left still lives on. I can never understand why the electoral poison of early-1980s retropolitics holds such an enduring emotional appeal for so many people in our party.

It defies belief that when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Iran is tooling up with nuclear weapons, and when Pakistan (inherently unstable and a hotbed of Islamist militancy) has already got one, there are serious politicians in the UK saying that we should get rid of our nuclear deterrent.

I really despair of my party sometimes!
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 01, 2006, 05:08:43 PM »

RENEW TRIDENT!

Hearing Labour backbenchers on Radio 4 saying that we should, in effect, implement unilateral nuclear disarmament, is like an old horror movie where an ancient mummy comes back to life, climbs out of its sarcophagus and starts walking around terrifying everybody.

It really pains me sometimes to see how, despite twelve years of New Labour and the Blair revolution, that the unreconstructed left still lives on. I can never understand why the electoral poison of early-1980s retropolitics holds such an enduring emotional appeal for so many people in our party.

It defies belief that when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Iran is tooling up with nuclear weapons, and when Pakistan (inherently unstable and a hotbed of Islamist militancy) has already got one, there are serious politicians in the UK saying that we should get rid of our nuclear deterrent.

I really despair of my party sometimes!

Those are the only two options? Trident or disarm your subfleets? You couldn't build your own missile? or buy them from...gag...the french (EU spirit I guess)?
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 01, 2006, 06:48:46 PM »

and I thought this thread was going to be about gum.  Sad
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 01, 2006, 07:49:20 PM »

and I thought this thread was going to be about gum.  Sad

Isn't trident good for your teeth? What would the British want with that?

Tongue
Logged
KEmperor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,454
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 01, 2006, 07:54:31 PM »

and I thought this thread was going to be about gum.  Sad

Isn't trident good for your teeth? What would the British want with that?

Tongue

Didn't you read the post?  That's why they are thinking of getting rid of it.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 01, 2006, 07:56:28 PM »

and I thought this thread was going to be about gum.  Sad

Isn't trident good for your teeth? What would the British want with that?

Tongue

Didn't you read the post?  That's why they are thinking of getting rid of it.

Touche salesman
Logged
jerusalemcar5
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,731
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -8.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 01, 2006, 09:21:47 PM »

and I thought this thread was going to be about gum.  Sad

Same.  It actually took me awhile to figure out it wasn't. Smiley
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2006, 12:57:11 AM »

The Vanguard class carries 16 Trident II (D5) missiles with British made and controlled warheads.  Frankly, given that the U.S. has made plans to extend the service life of the Ohios and their D5 missiles, I suspect that the most cost effective way for the U.K. to maintain their nuclear force would be to do the same with the Vanguards.

Given the small number of warheads deployed, it would expensive to do what the French are doing and build a complete system from scratch.  Switching to the Le Triomphant/M51 system in place of Vanguard/D5 would be even more expensive as you'd either have to rebuild the Vanguards or build four new subs from scratch as the M51 and D5 missiles are not compatible (the French M51 is shorter and fatter than the D5).

The same imperatives that led the British to reject a land-based system in favor of Polaris in the1960's still apply.

Unless the U.S. decides to develop a new cruise missile program soon, I can't see either an air or sea launched nuclear cruise missile as being a viable alternative for the British either.  The AGM-129 production lines have been closed for over a decade now and reopening them for a British order of 100-200 ALCMs would be expensive and the very real desirability of keeping a distinction between nuclear and conventional weapons systems means that a nuclear tipped Tomahawk would not be a good idea.  Indeed, I doubt we would sell the Brits Tomahawks if we knew they were intended to tipped with nuclear warheads instead of the conventional ones that all current Tomahawks carry.

In short, from the POV of having an effective nuclear deterrent at the lowest possible cost, I can't see any option other than maintaining and upgrading  the existing Vanguard/D5 system as being practical for the U.K. for now.
Logged
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,951


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 02, 2006, 02:16:46 AM »

and I thought this thread was going to be about gum.  Sad

I bet WalterMitty is disappointed that it isn't.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,306
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 02, 2006, 08:23:06 AM »

No, and it's not because I'm a unilateralist.

It's because we don't need the things and we should do some more nuke reduction negotation.

The Lib Dem proposal is the second best option.

See my blog for more on this.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 02, 2006, 01:51:13 PM »

Not replacing Trident wouldn't mean unilateral nuclear disarmament..

For Britain it would as it currently is Britain's only nuclear weapon platform.  At the very least Britain would need to develop a nuclear armed version of the Storm Shadow AGM for use by the Typhoon, but even with a stealthy aircraft and missile, I'd hate to have to be the pilot who had to get within 250km of the target to launch it.  Also, it is definitely better from the standpoint of avoiding accidental nuclear war to have distinct weapon systems for nuclear and conventional weapons.
Logged
merseysider
militant centrist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 524


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 02, 2006, 02:25:56 PM »


And leave it in the hands of people like you? I don't think so!
How dare you question my commitment to the Labour party!

I have been a member of, and activist in, the Labour Party since I was sixteen (i.e. for thirteen years). I could never imagine ever being a member of any other party. The core of my political beliefs is that Government has a duty to work towards a more equal society and to guarantee access to quality public services for all, regardless of ability to pay. I could never be described as anything other than left-of-centre; I believe politics is ultimately about where you stand on the economy.

I love the Labour party, but I can get incredibly frustrated with it sometimes. It sometimes seems to value heroic failure over success (look at how the most successful leader in our 100+ year history is being hounded out of office).

I am angry at the way too many of our supporters have spent the last nine years whining and whingeing, rather than shouting from the rooftops about our successes in building a more prosperous Britain, spreading opportunity more widely and investing in public services.

I get frustrated with the way that too many people in the party instinctively see the interests of the providers and consumers of public services as being the same; and are taken in by the ideological veneer placed on vested interests and resistance to reform by some of the public sector unions.

There is also the fact that too many people on the left of politics, though they would never admit it openly, even to themselves, actually prefer being in opposition. It's more fun to march around with banners denouncing everyone and everything than to make difficult decisions and to say no to your supporters. By implicitly seeing ourselves as a movement of righteous protest we have let down those supporters too many times.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,306
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2006, 06:11:50 AM »

I really should clarify my earlier post. I'm not a unilateralist.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2006, 11:15:38 AM »

There does seem to have been a small concession from Blair on this; 20% of the warheads will not be replaced and neither (probably) will one of the submarines.
A three month "consultation" is going to happen now, followed by a vote in the Commons (which will result in Trident getting replaced o/c; the Tories have always loved nukes and will vote in favour).
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2006, 04:11:37 PM »

From what I've read, you Brits weren't utilizing Trident D5 to its full anyway.  You only bought enough missiles to fill the silos of 3 1/2 Vanguards (Removing the missiles from the one of the four subs that was currently in overhaul.) and you weren't packing them full of warheads either, choosing to not bother with a full bus of 12 MIRV's per Trident D5, but only about 3.  If the RN is going to go from a 3+1 to 2+1 SSBN force, it can actually increase the number of warheads per active missile and still see a reduction in the total numbers.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,042
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2006, 02:07:49 PM »

Of course they should all be renewed.  Just because the Cold War is over does not mean there are no threats elsewhere (e.g. Middle East, potentially China), and there will never be any threats again.

Don't get me wrong; I have always hated the very idea of nuclear weapons, and always will.  But the fact is that they exist, and they won't be going away for a long time.  Unilateralism is a pretty idiotic and dangerous concept, especially once you look at some of the countries eager to get their hands on the bomb.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,306
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: March 13, 2007, 05:34:17 AM »

The vote's on Wednesday. And some Greenpeace people have climbed a crane at the Commons...
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 13 queries.