http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20101008_1258.php
Meanwhile, British Prime Minister David Cameron on Wednesday reaffirmed his determination to move forward with a $30 billion plan to modernize his country’s submarine-based nuclear deterrent, the London Daily Mail reported (see GSN, Sept. 30). The “like-for-line” plan for replacing the existing four vessels with four new submarines has been opposed by the Liberal Democrats, the junior partner in the nation’s Conservative Party-led coalition government.
“I will take no risks with Britain’s security,” Cameron said. “When more and more countries have or want nuclear weapons, we will always keep our ultimate insurance policy. We will renew our nuclear deterrent based on the Trident missile system” (Tim Shipman, London Daily Mail, Oct. 7).
By: ppp - 10th November 2010 at 10:27
Yeah sure , like UK going to nuke argentina over Falklands :rolleyes:
Maybe you should look up the difference between an SSN and an SSBN.
Actually the Falkland Islands defence consists of over a 1000 troops, 4 Typhoons, HMS Clyde, a standing patrol vessel (frigate or destroyer) and other bits and bobs.
Diego Garcia doesn’t need defending particularly and since the island is host to a USAF base and one of only 5 GPS ground stations on the planet, an attack there is more an attack on the USA than the UK.
True, though ultimately Diego is British sovereign territory, and we have forces there maintaining the sovereignty, even if they aren’t capable of countering an invasion.
If the nuclear deterrent is so important, why cancel the Nimrod MRA4, which would found and destroyed the foreign hunter-killers following our subs?
Assuming they can follow our SSBNs and that our SSBNs cannot lose them, which I have seen no source to suggest is the case. I have however, read many a rumour that the Russians cannot maintain this tail on our SSBNs. I’d therefore err on the side that the SSBNs can still perform their role with a similar level of effectiveness. My issue with Nimrods scrapping is its utility in supporting our land forces as it has been doing in the Middle East.
By: obligatory - 26th October 2010 at 12:27
Good question, i guess they count on no one wants to place all the bets on finding the SSBN on patrol
By: Al - 26th October 2010 at 08:25
If the nuclear deterrent is so important, why cancel the Nimrod MRA4, which would found and destroyed the foreign hunter-killers following our subs?
By: MadRat - 26th October 2010 at 04:23
Yeah sure , like UK going to nuke argentina over Falklands :rolleyes:
I was more talking about The Village Idi’s comment about SSN.
By: Grim901 - 24th October 2010 at 17:36
They are literally your Falkland Islands and Diego Garcia defense.
Actually the Falkland Islands defence consists of over a 1000 troops, 4 Typhoons, HMS Clyde, a standing patrol vessel (frigate or destroyer) and other bits and bobs.
Diego Garcia doesn’t need defending particularly and since the island is host to a USAF base and one of only 5 GPS ground stations on the planet, an attack there is more an attack on the USA than the UK.
By: Klargplutten - 23rd October 2010 at 17:32
Yeah sure , like UK going to nuke argentina over Falklands :rolleyes:
By: MadRat - 23rd October 2010 at 15:27
They are literally your Falkland Islands and Diego Garcia defense.
By: ppp - 17th October 2010 at 10:59
What makes you think that the SSN force will survive unscathed?
Not much left to cut!
By: The Village Idi - 15th October 2010 at 17:57
What makes you think that the SSN force will survive unscathed?
By: Austin - 12th October 2010 at 16:57
It would be good to see Brits keeping their submarine force both SSBN and SSN aways from any cuts. They have one of the best trained crew and subs in the world and to quote a Russian Admiral the most worthy challenger.
Sign In
October 12, 2010 at 12:55 pm