Corbyn & Trident
 

'Trident subs without warheads an option' - as just spoken by Jeremy Corbyn on the Andrew Marr Show.

And it gets better:

So, vote Jezza for a £40 billion investment in an impotent submarine weapons system (without the weapons) & to sell out the Falkland Islanders who can stay in Las Malvinas.

To quote Blackadder 2: 'excellent, sensible policies for a happier Britain'.

Madness, absolute madness.

Vast majority of the voting public couldn't give a toss about the FIs. And most of them are probably afraid of the nuclear weapons bogey-man.

I fear all these people mocking corbyn could be in for a shock. Voter apathy and an ill informed electorate could bite us all.

Yes, but voters could possible give a stuff about £40Bn being spent on a white elephant just to keep a relatively small number (15,000) of Northerners and Scots in their jobs.

Whilst we're at it, lets get all the shipyards, steelworks and coal mines going again together with British Leyland and the Morris Marina. Anyone remember the parlous state we were in during the mid-70s? :sad:

Yeah but the telly weren't arf good tho!

This is why Corbyn will never be PM, not because of his policies but his lack of communication skills. Emily Thornberry was just as bad on Sunday Politics. One of the options the Labour defence review will actually look at it is the 'Japenese' model whereby the delivery system is maintained but the warheads are removed and dismantled. Should circumstances change the warheads can be assembled and the delivery system is in place. Contrary to what Andrew Neil said the missiles will not be armed with conventional warheads both the missiles and submarines would be placed in care and maintenance.
I'm not convinced myself but it would be good to actually hear the arguments instead of incoherent ramblings by the Labour party.

If Corbyn had half a brain he'd be dangerous. As it is he's doing the country no favours at all making such a laughing stock of our future defence plans.

Imagine what our allies, eg the US Dept of Defence are thinking at the prospect of having to deal with this lunatic in the future. Not exactly enhancing our credibility in the world at large, is he?

imo he's a dangerous menace.

With a few words changed, this could have been written in the US regarding one of their leadership candidates:
S-D

I think the army should have lots of rifles but no ammunition. That man is potty.

Just when you thought he would not say anything more totally stupid, he did.

Mind you, he does work for the Tories :D

Effectively, is this not a step back to the 'unilateralist' days of Michael Foot's Labour Party? And what a disaster that was.


This is surely just a sop to the unions-Lets build the boats, keep the punters in a job, but then not bother with the key element of the deterrent (the warheads).


A nuclear deterrent without the 'nuclear' bit is surely as effective a deterrent as a chocolate fireguard.

Fascinating, I wonder if anyone has told the Japanese?

The shadow defence secretary, Emily Thornberry, later confirmed that the idea would be considered as part of the defence review, launched on Friday. Thornberry said it was the “Japanese option” to maintain submarines and nuclear capabilities without actually having operational nuclear weapons......

Thornberry told the BBC’s Sunday Politics: “The way that it works is that the Japanese have got a capability to build a nuclear bomb...[but] you can then put them on to, or you can use them, in various delivery forms. So that’s a possibility, that is an option.” She said she would not speculate on what the review would recommend but she added that Corbyn “said there’s a number of options, and I said the Japanese already have this as the way that they use theirs”.

Japan's non-nuclear weapons policy

Japan's non-nuclear weapons policy is a policy popularly articulated as the Three Non-Nuclear Principles of non-possession, non-production, and non-introduction of nuclear weapons.........

Pacifism bill: Why Japan won't build a nuclear weapon quickly

..........But it should be noted that under the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty -- which Japan ratified in 1976 -- states are entitled to peaceful nuclear technology for energy purposes if they forswear nuclear weapons.

To ensure that the country's nuclear sites remain exclusively for peaceful use, they are subjected to intensive scrutiny by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. The Agency consistently verifies the accuracy and completeness of Japan's declarations regarding its nuclear facilities, material, and activities and conducts monitoring and inspections at relevant facilities. Its role in Japan will continue to be particularly important in order to dispel any fears that the country may harbor nuclear weapons intentions.

China and the International Atomic Energy Agency are not the only ones following Japan's nuclear activity closely. Two other audiences are noteworthy. The first is Japan's public, who have become increasingly wary of the risks and dangers associated with nuclear technology -- whether for civilian or military applications -- following the disaster at Fukushima in 2011. The second is the country's closest ally, the United States, who is similarly attentive to the state of Japan's nuclear program.

This is ignoring the point of a SSBN force permanently at sea in the first place, to prevent decapitation and to respond to a first strike. Or is Corbyn expecting a letter? In the event that such a farcical policy was introduced, the first indication of any intent to deploy would itself be a major escalatory issue, inviting the very strike it is purported to prevent.

Maybe downgrading armourers to non aircraft trade was a precursor to aircraft without guns and bombs
; - )

Give the Falklands back, together with the rights to the oil and gas reserves there as well I suppose, wonder if he thought of that?

My thoughts exactly Treble One; I suspect however the review will recommend decommissioning the subs, missiles and warheads with the resultant savings being spent on job creation. As previously said echos of Foot in the 80s, what odds an increased Tory majority in 2020?

A more practical solution might be to keep the Labour Party but remove Jeremy Corbyn.

It won't be long...

So supposing the ICBM's he will launch are minus nuclear warheads, surely the Russians will not in the minutes before impact be able to differentiate between none nuclear and nuclear ICBM's so would react accordingly and respond... Unless Corbyn has some devious plan to install a radio transmitter in the missile transmitting a strong "we are not amused, but are firing blanks message".. :p


Carriers without aircraft and subs without missiles.. What next

I wouldn't be as sure as I once was of that if the stories are true of the hard left looking to 'cleanse' the PLP machinery and Commons of anyone who doesn't agree with Comrade Jerry and his band of brothers. He could well be in for the long haul if he's successful and the PLP fully exorcises the New Labour elements.

How that will play out in the polls is anyone's guess if the recent article in the Indie was correct, reporting a study that suggested the UK population as a whole was more left wing than previously thought. Admittedly it was the University of Sussex, so take that as you will, but I do think JC's going to be around a lot longer than CDS!

he's working on that one.......

Jeremy Corbyn says he would lift the ban on workers going on 'sympathy strike' to support colleagues

Amazing. This is surely the dumbest idea in the history of nuclear deterrent thinking, including Shell Game, Dense Pack and all the other 70s-80s concepts.

And as noted, Corby's "Japanese option" doesn't exist.

Aircraft Carriers without aircraft---Oh, hang on:eek: