Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Corbyn & Trident

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Corbyn & Trident

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 18th Jan 2016, 17:07
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The arguments for or against nuclear deterrence aren't really the point here;it's the fact of Mr Corbyn's intention to use the UK Defence budget as a Labour Party slush-fund to pay an electoral bribe to would-be supporters in the defence industry.

The Corbyn plan would swallow a gigantic sum of our money-and contribute no more to the nations defence than if he'd paid Red Robbo and his comrades to build two million Austin Allegro's and dump them in the North Atlantic!
ShotOne is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2016, 17:42
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 3,505
Received 175 Likes on 96 Posts
No -it has the "Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan"
Is that more or less expensive than Trident?
TURIN is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2016, 20:25
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So whilst I do not agree with Mr Corbyn on, well anything! I would not consider him uninitelligent. I did not see the interview, so can anyone here even attempt to outline his rationale? From what I do understand, this is the most hairbrained idea I have heard of!
PeterGee is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2016, 20:46
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,285
Received 712 Likes on 250 Posts
My worry is that this topic ought to have been/ still be headline gnus. Not a lot of take up except amongst the terrified informed, is there?
langleybaston is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 08:40
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Sunny
Posts: 1,601
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by Rotate too late
Yeah but the telly weren't arf good tho!
Yep, lots of poor taste comedies (Dad's Army notwithstanding) involving stereotypical comments about 'poofs' and 'darkies'. Clearly a golden age...
Whenurhappy is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 08:43
  #66 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Corbyne good for defence

LB, obviously not looking in the right place. The lovies may not cover it but the broadsheets and unions do. He has brought Defence well in to the public eye.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 08:52
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Sunny
Posts: 1,601
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by PeterGee
So whilst I do not agree with Mr Corbyn on, well anything! I would not consider him uninitelligent. I did not see the interview, so can anyone here even attempt to outline his rationale? From what I do understand, this is the most hairbrained idea I have heard of!
I'm no fan of Dave Spart, but I watched the interview and he came across rather better than I anticipated. Though there's no question of handing over the FI, the current situation of maintaining a stupendously expensive garrison in the face of a desperately broke nation that can't accord fuel for their coast guard RIBs is a bit ridiculous.

But these aren't the polucies that will get the Labour Party elected. Consider the battle between Popularist policies presenting free university places, rent controls, more Council housing, nationalised utilities, British Rail, higher living wage...in the face of 12 years of (necessary) austerity and more 'fat cat' Tory rule. Add to this the entryism of the Hard Left (Militant veterans of the 1980s) and I'm not sure the results of the 2020 election will be that easy to call
Whenurhappy is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 15:13
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,285
Received 712 Likes on 250 Posts
Quote: .in the face of 12 years of (necessary) austerity

I just don't see "austerity" biting much round here. I don't see it at all.

We were in Spalding at 0830 this morning. Spalding is not, repeat not, prosperous. Agriculture and the dole are the main sources of income [commuting is not easy, and Polish workers snap up jobs the natives cannot be bothered to do].

We could not get into Greggs for a bacon sarnie ......... a very long queue of teenagers buying [and consuming] breakfast. Given that they or their parents could not be bothered with providing breakfast, at least some of them would also be buying lunch later. At a minimum, this has to be about £3 a day for 20 days a month.

They almost all had smart fones ........ bun in one hand, fone in the other. Not cheap, whether contract or purchase.

So that is, say, £50 to £100 per teenager per month.

Austerity?

I accept that matters will be a lot worse in some areas, but they are also a lot better [more prosperous] in many others.

I am tempted to quote Harold MacMillan.
langleybaston is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 17:02
  #69 (permalink)  

"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Age: 77
Posts: 4,142
Received 224 Likes on 66 Posts
I am tempted to quote Harold MacMillan.
I know you didn't mean this one, but it applies as well.

"The wind of change is blowing through this continent"
Herod is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 18:19
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Age: 79
Posts: 547
Received 45 Likes on 17 Posts
You"ve never had it so good !!!!!!!!!
RetiredBA/BY is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 18:29
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Wasn't that Kenneth Williams?
Ian Corrigible is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 18:31
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: cheshire
Age: 67
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nuclear Deterrent

Although a bit off topic for an aviation forum, there appear to be a few inaccuracies in the above posts which I would like to clarify. The Trafalgar class mentioned is a class of 7 not 4 boats. None of which have ICBM missiles, rather they have the capability of non-nuclear weapons such as TLAM. These 'T' class boats are being replaced, extremely slowly by the 'A' class boats, such as HMS Astute. These again are not ICBM capable. The 'V' class boats, such as HMS Trafalgar, are a class of 4 vessels and are equipped with ICBMs. They will require replacing over the next decade.

I Believe Corbyn was referring to a new class of ICBM capable boats, which he would build but not arm. I totally agree that this is absurd. However as a Country we have to decide if ICBMs are affordable. If so, the new vessels should be built. If not, its totally pointless building ICBM capable boats which are considerably more expensive that other types and less capable of meeting other requirements. (Unless of course this is gerrymandering, sounding great to the extreme left but at the same time having the weapons available to load at short notice, thereby he realizes that they are in fact, needed).

There is of course a third option, to fit non ICBM boats with Nuclear tipped TLAM conventional weapons. However there would be inherent problems with this, range, payload, and not the minor problem of agreement with the U.S., and redesigning them as they are their expensive toys we are playing with after all.
harbour cotter is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 18:35
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: cheshire
Age: 67
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
last post!

I made an error in the last post, the 'V' class boats should obviously have been 'HMS Vanguard' etc
harbour cotter is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 18:44
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 3,505
Received 175 Likes on 96 Posts
We could not get into Greggs for a bacon sarnie ......... a very long queue of teenagers buying [and consuming] breakfast. Given that they or their parents could not be bothered with providing breakfast, at least some of them would also be buying lunch later. At a minimum, this has to be about £3 a day for 20 days a month.
If they are eating at Greggs everyday I shouldn't worry too much about their future...they haven't got one.
TURIN is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 18:54
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Sunny
Posts: 1,601
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by AR1
Thatcher was well on the way to dumping FI, but Galterri jumped the gun and now she's revered. Look at the paper's, they're on line.
Corbyn is rightly questioning our role in the world. Do you really believe our Nuclear Deterrent is independant? It's not.

We're in a club where we can no longer afford the membership. Simple.
Thatcher wasn't going to dump the Falklands, but Labour had discussed it some years earlier and Galtieri linked that with the planned withdrawal of HMS Endurance, and the Latin machismo that reckoned that the economic basket case of Britain led by a women wouldn't respond. Fortunately the junta made a huge miscalculation; moreover the decision to land the Argentine Task Force was only made the day before.

Last edited by Whenurhappy; 19th Jan 2016 at 19:15.
Whenurhappy is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 19:09
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What's the big deal? He's only copying Camermong re carriers/Nimrod etc,etc..
glad rag is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2016, 19:20
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Sunny
Posts: 1,601
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by langleybaston
Quote: .in the face of 12 years of (necessary) austerity

I just don't see "austerity" biting much round here. I don't see it at all.

We were in Spalding at 0830 this morning. Spalding is not, repeat not, prosperous. Agriculture and the dole are the main sources of income [commuting is not easy, and Polish workers snap up jobs the natives cannot be bothered to do].

We could not get into Greggs for a bacon sarnie ......... a very long queue of teenagers buying [and consuming] breakfast. Given that they or their parents could not be bothered with providing breakfast, at least some of them would also be buying lunch later. At a minimum, this has to be about £3 a day for 20 days a month.

They almost all had smart fones ........ bun in one hand, fone in the other. Not cheap, whether contract or purchase.

So that is, say, £50 to £100 per teenager per month.

Austerity?

I accept that matters will be a lot worse in some areas, but they are also a lot better [more prosperous] in many others.

I am tempted to quote Harold MacMillan.
There is, without a doubt, a reduction in Government spending - especially what cascades down to councils and organizations like the Environment Agency. Welfare spending has changed, but the beneficiaries are already Labour or SNP supporters...but these Labour policies are attractive to swing voters...
Whenurhappy is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2016, 19:27
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lancing, Sussex
Age: 92
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Corbyn & Trident

As it used to be said, somewhere there is a village lacking an idiot, will he please go home.
Without the nuclear option, to have a viable deterent to put off any possible attackers we would nned a vast increase in the size of our converntial forces, where would that money come from.
Exnomad is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2016, 20:03
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,222
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Judging by the way military T&Cs are going where are the people coming from.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2016, 20:37
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why has Japan not been attacked?
Why? Lots of different reasons. A few of them relate to the many thousands of US military personnel stationed in Japan.

Does it have an 'independent' nuclear deterrent?
Nope. So far Japan is content to rely totally on the US for its nuclear deterrent. It'll be interesting to see how long that lasts as its North Korean neighbor develops the means to reliably deliver their nukes.
KenV is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.