Article

2005-05-02 Britain

Blair may overhaul British nuclear deterrent system

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2005-05-02 12:34:27 AM|| || Front Page|| [11130 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 since US law forbade the Americans from constructing nuclear weapons for another country Sigh! Any chance of this law being revoked? At some time in the future it may well be an issue for Japan and even Australia. And if you can't trust the Brits, Japanese and Aussies, who can you trust?

Posted by phil_b 2005-05-02 6:38:29 AM|| 2005-05-02 6:38:29 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 10 bilion pounds for nukes? When their conventional forces are so severly underfunded? Somebodies priorities are out of whack. We need to get closer ties to the UK so they feel comfortable being under the umbrella and don't waste money on nukes. The Japanese have been smatrt in this regard, though the Koreans and Chinese may make them start to pick up a tab too.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-05-02 6:44:39 AM|| 2005-05-02 6:44:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 What's wrong with the Trident system?

Posted by Shipman 2005-05-02 7:23:04 AM|| 2005-05-02 7:23:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Ship, It's old. Must be 70's vintage.

Posted by phil_b 2005-05-02 7:33:33 AM|| 2005-05-02 7:33:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 phil_b:
I don't think it will be necessary. Japan is quite capable of making its own nukes. They're rich enough and have all the technology necessary. Heck, they'd probably be smaller and have a higher J.D.Power quality rating than ours. We'd probably end up buying from them.
Australia is another matter, more for the lack of money to build the infrastructure than any shortage know-how. Maybe they can buy some from North Korea or Iran?

Posted by Jackal 2005-05-02 9:27:14 AM|| [http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2005-05-02 9:27:14 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 The warheads are circa 1992, maybe it's a warhead problem, hummmm..... sounds familiar.

Posted by Shipman 2005-05-02 9:49:27 AM|| 2005-05-02 9:49:27 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 What's wrong with the Trident system?

Nothing, it won't be retired until 2024. Quoting the article:
"The defense source... ...said it took an extremely long time to build new nuclear weapons, which is why the decision had to come far in advance of decommissioning the Tridents, expected in 2024."

Posted by Biff Wellington 2005-05-02 10:08:52 AM|| 2005-05-02 10:08:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Where's Horatio Nelson when needed?

Posted by Tkat 2005-05-02 10:19:09 AM|| 2005-05-02 10:19:09 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 he's dead, Jim

Posted by Frank G 2005-05-02 11:03:16 AM|| 2005-05-02 11:03:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Heck, they'd probably be smaller and have a higher J.D.Power quality rating than ours.

Jackal, that comment is a riot!

Posted by Alaska Paul 2005-05-02 11:10:08 AM|| 2005-05-02 11:10:08 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Our warheads could stand a refresh too...

As for priorities being out of whack, it's always been cheaper to build another hundred nukes than to put another 1,000 tanks into Germany. Cold War economics.

Posted by Iblis 2005-05-02 12:31:05 PM|| 2005-05-02 12:31:05 PM|| Front Page Top

16:22 Gromons Gloper2496
16:16 Gromons Gloper2496
16:05 Gromons Gloper2496
16:03 Gromons Gloper2496
15:56 Gromons Gloper2496
15:54 Gromons Gloper2496
15:52 Gromons Gloper2496
15:41 Gromons Gloper2496
15:29 Gromons Gloper2496
15:28 Gromons Gloper2496
15:15 Gromons Gloper2496
14:59 Gromons Gloper2496
12:01 Juan
00:14 thibaud (aka lex)
23:50 JosephMendiola
23:19 Sherry
23:15 .com
23:10 .com
23:04 Fred as himself
22:59 Pappy
22:56 VAMark
22:54 Jury-sex
22:51 .commissioner
22:50 .commingler