Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Definitely
Poll: Trident - would you renew? (Poll)
- Thread starter Nitefly
- Start date
apparently we cant launch with the yanks permission. I think they are pointless.
The government equivalent of a shiny BMW with a massive sub in the back.
will nukes stop terrorist attacks ? of course they won't.
just what is the point of them seriously - if things are so bad that nukes must be launched then everyone is totally fubar anyway.
and just think in the event of nukes being used its people like us being vaporised and the stupid out of touch criminals in government hiding in a bunker with 200 or so zombie slaves waiting to serve them when its safe to come out again.
we have better things to spend 250 billion on.
The government equivalent of a shiny BMW with a massive sub in the back.
will nukes stop terrorist attacks ? of course they won't.
just what is the point of them seriously - if things are so bad that nukes must be launched then everyone is totally fubar anyway.
and just think in the event of nukes being used its people like us being vaporised and the stupid out of touch criminals in government hiding in a bunker with 200 or so zombie slaves waiting to serve them when its safe to come out again.
we have better things to spend 250 billion on.
Renew - We can launch without the us's permission, not that we would mind you
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 6,190
- Location
- melee island
If you want to hear it from another source, here you go!
http://www.politico.eu/article/uk-trident-nuclear-program/
Not true.
We have a considerable amount of equipment in our military inventory that also won't stop terrorist attacks - that doesn't make it pointless - there are different tools for different tasks.
The whole point of them is stopping things getting to the point its totally fubar.
Maybe its because it is part of reciprocal agreements i.e. Chobham armour (used as an example rather than being specific to this case) rather than out of the kindness of the US's hearts :S
Trident wasn't 'donated to the uk' we helped fund the development and other costs. Plus, the wardheads aren't bought from the us.
The agreements with sharing were started in the 1960's after the uk demonstrated it had the knowledge to design a thermonuclear warhead.
As i recall though, the agreements also included use of uk bases for us use and sharing inteligence between UK and US agencies. Certainly though, Trident delivery system was not donated.
The agreements with sharing were started in the 1960's after the uk demonstrated it had the knowledge to design a thermonuclear warhead.
As i recall though, the agreements also included use of uk bases for us use and sharing inteligence between UK and US agencies. Certainly though, Trident delivery system was not donated.
Copied and pasted form someones facebook page:
has tyre iron under my bed. It has been there since I found it in the boot of my car following a service many years ago. It is very heavy and it is in my possession in case of a home invasion. If I had an invader in my house and he or she got hit with this then they would be injured very badly. A blow to the head would probably kill them so I would go for a body blow if the situation ever arose. Luckily it has never been used as my home has never been burgled or under siege from anyone. It is not the greatest and most surefire deterrent but it will do for me as the chances of somebody coming up my staircase in the middle of the night is virtually zero.
My question is, should I upgrade this tyre iron for a slightly larger and possibly more effective one? A new one is just as effective as the old one and no different in it's threat or deterrent value. Problem is, an upgrade is going to cost more than £70 BILLION.
This is Trident.
has tyre iron under my bed. It has been there since I found it in the boot of my car following a service many years ago. It is very heavy and it is in my possession in case of a home invasion. If I had an invader in my house and he or she got hit with this then they would be injured very badly. A blow to the head would probably kill them so I would go for a body blow if the situation ever arose. Luckily it has never been used as my home has never been burgled or under siege from anyone. It is not the greatest and most surefire deterrent but it will do for me as the chances of somebody coming up my staircase in the middle of the night is virtually zero.
My question is, should I upgrade this tyre iron for a slightly larger and possibly more effective one? A new one is just as effective as the old one and no different in it's threat or deterrent value. Problem is, an upgrade is going to cost more than £70 BILLION.
This is Trident.
About the level of things on Facebook.
They are a waste of money in this day and age but decommission would cost a lot if we were going to get rid of the missile capacity. The logical thing then would be to use the missiles we have to nuke the Middle East and North Africa so it looks like a nice pane of glass, and in doing so do the world a really big favour, and then not renew any submarines. That's the most cost effective and simple solution imho.
Good plan but they wouldn't get there. Royal Navy ships can't go past the equator the engines don't like warm water.
No it is not. We are replacing the submarines. The equivalent would be your home is reaching its serviceable life and you are going to replace it while moving the tyre iron to the new home. Remember your home cycles the globe deep under water and its life support is a ageing nuclear reactor.
Missing the point that without the upgrade it is potentially ineffective not just slightly less effective.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
No point in them I don't think the nuclear deterrent is applicable to today
If a country launched a nuke the world would be ruined.
If someone is mad enough to. Launch one, they are mad enough not to care about a deterrent
Any country with any worldwide interest (ie any country) will not nuke anyone. .
If one nuke just hit London I'd rather be under it than left behind.
The world would never be the same.
These aren't hiroshima type bombs. I'm assuming they are many more times destructive.
If a country launched a nuke the world would be ruined.
If someone is mad enough to. Launch one, they are mad enough not to care about a deterrent
Any country with any worldwide interest (ie any country) will not nuke anyone. .
If one nuke just hit London I'd rather be under it than left behind.
The world would never be the same.
These aren't hiroshima type bombs. I'm assuming they are many more times destructive.
Last edited:
What's the serviceable life on a tyre iron does anyone know? Do they still provide software and hardware updates to the tyre iron?