BBC: "MPs 'Concerned' Over Defence Cuts"

Discussion in 'MoD News' started by soleil, Mar 27, 2014.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. "The crisis in Crimea shows that the UK must maintain both nuclear weapons and armed forces capable of providing a "credible deterrent", MPs have said.

    The Commons Defence Committee said it was "concerned" former US Defence Secretary Robert Gates recently warned cuts would leave the UK without the "ability to be a full partner".

    The UK should consider more the effect on allies of military cuts, MPs said."

    BBC News - MPs 'concerned' over defence cuts
  2. A bit late to wake up. Anyway, all Putin needs to do is leave sufficient time between pushes for the voting and tax paying public and their Parliament to lose interest (about 6 weeks with present day goldfishlike attention spans). Leave Moldova until the May Bank Holiday and he's probably home and dry.
  3. How can it be said that a nuclear deterrent is failing in it's objective? How many nuclear wars have there been? Or are they playing on the argument that it's a waste of money as it's never been used or ignoring the argument that it's totally successful as it's deterred a nuclear war (possibly, who knows?)
  4. No. It doesn't. What it actually says is :

    which is neither news, nor rocket science.

    Importantly, it also says.....

    Last edited: Mar 27, 2014
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Underlying message is that nuclear deterrence is slowly losing its ground.
  6. No. The underlying message is that deterrence via buckets of sunshine is not a once size fits all solution, almost entirely down to the potential for non-state or proxy actors where proof of liability (for subsequent glass car-parking) is difficult.

    In fact, they're even explicit about it....

    Last edited: Mar 27, 2014
    • Like Like x 1
  7. britain having Trident is absolutely absurd it is akin to the pope being blessed with a gigantic COCK it will never be used
  8. You clearly have no idea of the concept and philosophy behind a deterrent have you.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    @ Bacon ...Did you get that from an Andy McNab book?
    • Like Like x 1
  10. we should get rid of it and stop pretending were something that we are not,the only country in the free world that should posses nukes are the yanks,......there is no doubt if WE started firing ours then they would also be firing theirs,so we should save some cash or write of the MOD's debts,then perhaps we could sort out the god forsaken mess that is this country..imo

    as for Mcnab,no it was my line
  11. Why should the septics be the only ones allowed nukes and if we fired ours, theirs would already be in the air and not coming in our direction either, nor ours in theirs.
  12. clearly i'am not suggesting we would be firing at each other,...but if we dont have them its quite likely we wont end up a target in the process,and the reason they imo are the only ones that should have them is they are the only ones in the free world who can a]afford them and b]be trusted to only ever use them in dire circumstance....nukes are making the world an unsafer place imho.
  13. Correct, so if we have them, there's less chance one will come our way. In an uncertain world, it's best to be one of those who have a big stick.

    The nicest option is for no-one to have them but they're here to stay unfortunately and even if every nuclear armed country agreed to dispose of them, how would you know they have?
  14. Yes. Of course.
  15. UUUMMM let me think did the local council give power and wifi to camp out side Fazzers? They were always talking about getting rid of Nukes? But give them to that trusted nation across the pond, I DO NOT THINK SO?
  16. You really should watch the news
    a] Its not that long ago that most of their civil servants got sent home as they could not pay them until they had raised their borrowing limit. The states are in a financial mess.
    b] Why should they be trusted any more than any of the other nuclear powers? The closest we have ever come to nuclear holocaust was when JFK decided it was OK for the US of A to have nukes in the USSRs back yard, but there was no way he would allow them to have theirs in his, not to mention plans to drop 10 - 15 bombs on china in the late 50s
  17. Everyday it is not used is a success, if there was ever a need to use it it would mean we were in bigggg trouble. America probably shouldn't be described as the most responsible, how insulting to the rest of us- and they are skinto too.

Share This Page