Does GB need nuclear weapons?

[Tangled up in Blue]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07knlf4www.bbc.com/news/uk-36822460

I don't think so but then I'm a unilateralist.

Even if I wasn't,I'd still think they were a waste of money.

Over to you.

 

[MK Shrimper]

Sure are. Any threat to this country doesn't come from individual nation states but a twisted ideology, and nukes are no defence against a sole lunatic with a suicide vest or one driving a lorry.

 

[mrsblue]

Sure are. Any threat to this country doesn't come from individual nation states but a twisted ideology, and nukes are no defence against a sole lunatic with a suicide vest or one driving a lorry.

.
True but if Russia have us in their sights ,then they will think again,would Russia have invaded Ukraine if they had nukes..Defo not.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Yes we do. When Iran gets nuked up, I would fancy that the English and the French will be feeling quite pleased with their stash of warheads as the rest of Europe is held to ransom.

 

[rigsby]

Sure are. Any threat to this country doesn't come from individual nation states but a twisted ideology, and nukes are no defence against a sole lunatic with a suicide vest or one driving a lorry.

Apart from Russia of course. Best to keep an eye on the Chinese while were at it. They could certainly do some damage.

Lots of people thought military spending in the 1930's was a complete waste of money. I mean after the slaughter of WW1 who in their right mind was ever going to start another war.

 

[Up the Shrimpers]

Massive vote in favour from the MP's

in favour 472, against 117.

 

[leeblue]

Mutually
Assured
Destruction.... that is all

 

[Jam_Man]

Our main threat on a day to day basis is from lone wolf/small groups of terrorists that nuclear weapons have no relevance to.

That doesnt mean we should ignore the threats from other nuclear powers.

Only time we shouldnt have them is if no one has them, and that wont happen.

 

[superblue24]

Common sense prevails amongst MPs for a change. *phew*

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Mutually
Assured
Destruction.... that is all

M.A.D. kept the cold war from getting hot. Sounds quite sane to me.

 

[superblue24]

Our main threat on a day to day basis is from lone wolf/small groups of terrorists that nuclear weapons have no relevance to.

That doesnt mean we should ignore the threats from other nuclear powers.

Only time we shouldnt have them is if no one has them, and that wont happen.

This. They will hopefully never be more than an "insurance" policy, but no way would we want to hand them over while everyone else keep theirs...... No thanks.

 

[londonblue]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07knlf4www.bbc.com/news/uk-36822460

I don't think so but then I'm a unilateralist.

Even if I wasn't,I'd still think they were a waste of money.

Over to you.

How do you know what you would think if you didn't have the views you have? That's impossible.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

How do you know what you would think if you didn't have the views you have? That's impossible.

Granted it's a hypothetical.:winking:

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

The vote says a lot about Britain and how it sees itself in the modern world. An extremely difficult decision but I'd just come down on the side of non-renewal due to the exorbitant cost..............but there are other reasons. There again, I have been told that, when unbridled from the chains of the EU, the UK will become a booming world and economic powerhouse. :winking: So I suppose you could argue, we need our nukes to keeps us at the top table of major powers!:smile:

 

[Gremlin]

How does anyone know whether or not we NEED nuclear weapons? I certainly don't. What I do know though is that I wouldn't like to not have them and then discover that we did need them when it's too late. On that basis, retain.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

How does anyone know whether or not we NEED nuclear weapons? I certainly don't. What I do know though is that I wouldn't like to not have them and then discover that we did need them when it's too late. On that basis, retain.

There's lots of people who live without fire insurance for their house! :winking: More seriously without our nuclear deterent aren't we still protected by NATO. Do we still have an American nuclear force based in the UK??? In the end.........and I presume it would be the end..............does it matter whether Obama (Trump/Clinton), François, or May's finger is on the button as we are vapourised?

 

[southendkid]

We're probably better off with them than without, if there is a serious nuclear threat we aren't going to have time to build them if we aren't prepared. In an ideal world no one would have nukes because if one is ever launched millions if not billions will probably die due to mutually assured destruction but unfortunately that isn't feasible.

That being said it's a minor miracle we haven't killed the human race yet due to nukes, there have been some worryingly close calls in the past. For example during the Cuban missile crisis one twitchy Russian sub captain after going deep underwater to evade the US (losing all radio contact) decided that because they couldn't know what was happening on the surface and they were under attack that possibly nuclear war had started so he decided to fire a nuclear torpedo. If this was any other sub he would have been able to do this but fortunately the commander of the flotilla, Vasili Arkhipov, was also on board and so was able to block the launch as he was equal in rank to the captain. If he wasn't on board we likely would have seen nuclear war.

I'd hope everyone had learnt from this and we now know that letting captains of subs have the ability to fire nukes themselves without higher permission is a stupid idea but it's a pretty big worry that if Iran or someone else gets armed with nukes they'll be just as irresponsible with them. It makes me think that there's some validity to the theory that the reason we've had no contact with alien races is because any race close to developing technology to let them visit us must have already gone extinct from launching WMDs at each other.

 

[MK Shrimper]

t makes me think that there's some validity to the theory that the reason we've had no contact with alien races is because any race close to developing technology to let them visit us must have already gone extinct from launching WMDs at each other.

I was with you until that bit. :stunned:

 

[Gremlin]

In the end.........and I presume it would be the end..............does it matter whether Obama (Trump/Clinton), François, or May's finger is on the button as we are vapourised?

A scenario where the deterrent hasn't deterred? I agree that in this case almost everything else becomes immaterial.

 

[Napster]

£200bn that could be spent on education, the health service. Nuts. The technology will be out of date by the time it's being used. Our enemy doesn't use nukes, but suicide attacks.