# Gib more jobs, Trident



## 90199 (Mar 21, 2010)

Moving Trident to Gib, I anticipate some feathers will be ruffled.

EXCLUSIVE: Gibraltar earmarked for Trident move if SNP succeed | World | News | Daily Express


----------



## olivefarmer (Oct 16, 2012)

Neat solution!


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

Yes, very neat. As we are committed to 'No First Use' (I believe) this will mean that most of the Campo de Gibraltar will be a front-line target in case of nuclear attack. I'm sure the Spanish Government will be a bit put out about that and tbh I'm not too pleased myself as I live a forty minute or so drive away.

Ah well....now I can add another reason for scrapping this useless, expensive piece of junk: self-preservation.
Trident is as useful as a chocolate teapot in protecting us against the main threat to the UK, domestic terrorism, now it's a major threat to me and millions of others here in Spain.


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

Have just realised that this comes from the Daily Express, which is I believe owned by rabid right-winger and porn-meister Richard Desmond.

So probably as much of a fantasy as the other 'news' in this pathetic rag.


----------



## 90199 (Mar 21, 2010)

mrypg9 said:


> have just realised that this comes from the daily express, which is i believe owned by rabid right-winger and porn-meister richard desmond.
> 
> So probably as much of a fantasy as the other 'news' in this pathetic rag.



Ho Ho Ho


----------



## olivefarmer (Oct 16, 2012)

mrypg9 said:


> Yes, very neat. As we are committed to 'No First Use' (I believe) this will mean that most of the Campo de Gibraltar will be a front-line target in case of nuclear attack. I'm sure the Spanish Government will be a bit put out about that and tbh I'm not too pleased myself as I live a forty minute or so drive away.
> 
> Ah well....now I can add another reason for scrapping this useless, expensive piece of junk: self-preservation.
> Trident is as useful as a chocolate teapot in protecting us against the main threat to the UK, domestic terrorism, now it's a major threat to me and millions of others here in Spain.


Expensive it maybe but in my view sadly a necessary evil. Given that a great many defence analysts/experts think the same way then Britain has to keep the deterrent whilst the rest (large part anyway) of the Europe rides for free on its coat tails. That being the case it is a damn nuisance that the SNP want it "kicking off their soil." at the taxpayers expense. Of course if/when the Russians, Iranians, Israelis, Chinese or even possibly the Indians kick off they may just be glad of the billions spent on its replacement.

I do agree with you on the other threat. ISIS (or whatever we call them today) propagated by *our* actions in overthrowing stable but apparently undesirable governments and not having a thought out plan for the end result. 

By the way, Southern Spain has been a target already for some years. Gib has always been. On top of that the yanks have their land based aircraft carrier not far away.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

I seem to remember there being a lot of fuss a few years ago when a British nuclear submarine was docked in Gibratar for repairs - the objections came from the Gibraltarians themselves.

Gibraltar halts repair of nuclear submarine - Telegraph

I agree with Mary that Trident is a total waste of money. And anyway, we now have the NATO anti-missile shield based at Rota just along the coast, in the form of four American anti-ballistic missile destroyers. I'm sure Uncle Sam will protect us from foreign foes. 

Europe’s missile shield grows – thanks to the US Navy


----------



## baldilocks (Mar 7, 2010)

Re-activate the London docks as close to Westminster as possible!


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

olivefarmer said:


> Expensive it maybe but in my view sadly a necessary evil. Given that a great many defence analysts/experts think the same way then Britain has to keep the deterrent whilst the rest (large part anyway) of the Europe rides for free on its coat tails. That being the case it is a damn nuisance that the SNP want it "kicking off their soil." at the taxpayers expense. Of course if/when the Russians, Iranians, Israelis, Chinese or even possibly the Indians kick off they may just be glad of the billions spent on its replacement.
> 
> I do agree with you on the other threat. ISIS (or whatever we call them today) propagated by *our* actions in overthrowing stable but apparently undesirable governments and not having a thought out plan for the end result.
> 
> By the way, Southern Spain has been a target already for some years. Gib has always been. On top of that the yanks have their land based aircraft carrier not far away.


But our 'independent' deterrent didn't deter Galtieri from invading the Falklands. Our conventional forces were so poorly equipped for that combat that we had to get the old VBombers out of mothballs from RAF Marham.
Having the world's largest nuclear arsenal didn't save the U.S. from 9/11. 
As we are committed to having Trident ONLY as a 'deterrent' that means we will use it only when we know we are about to be incinerated. Revenge would be the last thing on sane people's minds in their last moments.
Our conventional forces are so poorly equipped that front-line soldiers in Afghanistan lacked basic equipment such as Kevlar vests. Shameful.
I'm no pacifist -if I thought Trident was of the slightest use I'd defend it -and we need to defend ourselves although I can't conceive of any hostile power that would invade us or nuke us. We need imo to beef up our conventional forces and also our intelligence services to counter the real threat to the UK, from radical Islamic jihadists.
Modern conventional weapons can do as much damage as nuclear weapons anyway, unfortunately. Even in WW2 as much damage if not more was done to Hamburg, Pforzheim and Tokyo by conventional HE than to Hiroshima and Nagasaki by atomic bombs.
It seems to me that Trident merely serves to delude we Brits that we are still a military superpower.
We do have influence...but it's 'soft power'....language, culture, commerce,know-how and so on.


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

Hepa said:


> Ho Ho Ho


Santas Against Nukes


----------



## olivefarmer (Oct 16, 2012)

Not much chance of the Uk beefing up its conventional forces. Defence cuts are the *in* word. 

What might help is the rest of NATO (with the exception of the poor Greeks who do commit 2%) committing their agreed 2% of GDP to defence and then NATO doing something about ISIS. However we have the Germans (pacifists 'cos it suits) going and kowtowing to anyone e.g. Putin.

Picture a situation where only one country had nuclear weapons and could deliver them anywhere. They would rule the planet. It is a nonsense to say nuclear weapons are ineffective. The whole point is none use and a sort of peaceful harmony. 

I wouldn't be too sure about the "we will use it only when we know we are about to be incinerated.". The rules are simple. Don't use nuclear weapons. If you do you and we will get incinerated BUT a small percent will survive and start a new but rubbish life). Funnily enough that might actually be quite a good thing for mankind as we haven't made a very good fist of our tenure of earth the first time round.


----------



## 90199 (Mar 21, 2010)

Surely the main point of this thread is the re location of the nuclear fleet.

Gibraltar has been surveyed, the territory and harbour appears suitable for the fleet to be re located and serviced when in port, or are the British just stirring the pot.

I have been to Gib many times, but never set foot on land, now if a nuclear sub was in port that might tempt me, I should go really historical family ties to the Rock, blooming Spanish blew us up during WW2, we survived


----------



## amespana (Nov 10, 2009)

Tell us more Hepa?


----------

