The Case For Trident

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
27,156
Location
Northumberland
Visit site
The reality is that the Argentine economy is always on the edge. Any chance to pop over to The Falklands would give the President a huge boost with the population plus bring extra money into their coffers from the oil revenue. If we reduced the numbers on The Falklands it would practically be an invitation to invade and we are in no position any more to regain it.

Whether we should be in The Falklands at all is another matter but if we are going to be there it is simpler to man it than try to regain it.

On a Trident theme, it didn't persuade the Argentines not to invade last time. Sorry, a big waste of money that we don't have for me.
 

DCB

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Messages
7,732
Location
Midlothian
Visit site
On a Trident theme, it didn't persuade the Argentines not to invade last time. Sorry, a big waste of money that we don't have for me.

We didn't have it in 1982 ;) however, one submarine patrolling the area was all that was needed to keep the Argentine Navy tied up in port.
 

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
18,116
Visit site
The reality is that the Argentine economy is always on the edge. Any chance to pop over to The Falklands would give the President a huge boost with the population plus bring extra money into their coffers from the oil revenue. If we reduced the numbers on The Falklands it would practically be an invitation to invade and we are in no position any more to regain it.

Whether we should be in The Falklands at all is another matter but if we are going to be there it is simpler to man it than try to regain it.

On a Trident theme, it didn't persuade the Argentines not to invade last time. Sorry, a big waste of money that we don't have for me.

What oil is that then?
 
D

Deleted member 15344

Guest
The reality is that the Argentine economy is always on the edge. Any chance to pop over to The Falklands would give the President a huge boost with the population plus bring extra money into their coffers from the oil revenue. If we reduced the numbers on The Falklands it would practically be an invitation to invade and we are in no position any more to regain it.

Well the oil position is still unsure yet

And yes we could regain the Falklands "IF" they by any chance invaded

Whether we should be in The Falklands at all is another matter but if we are going to be there it is simpler to man it than try to regain it.

The Falklands have voted to be part of the U.K. so that's the best reason for us to be their
On a Trident theme, it didn't persuade the Argentines not to invade last time. Sorry, a big waste of money that we don't have for me.

Trident isn't a deterrent to stop people invading the Falklands
 

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
27,156
Location
Northumberland
Visit site
The Falklands have voted to be part of the U.K. so that's the best reason for us to be their

Trident isn't a deterrent to stop people invading the Falklands

Self determination is the key which is why I support the current position. However, a map of the world explains why our right to the Falklands is tenuous. Really it should be independent but then it is likely that the Argentines would invade so we are pretty much stuck with the status quo.

Can we specify who we are deterring Trident with? Does it work that way? Do we have a list of which countries we are deterring?

(sorry, I will try to learn the multi quote thingy)
 
D

Deleted member 15344

Guest
Self determination is the key which is why I support the current position. However, a map of the world explains why our right to the Falklands is tenuous. Really it should be independent but then it is likely that the Argentines would invade so we are pretty much stuck with the status quo.

Can we specify who we are deterring Trident with? Does it work that way? Do we have a list of which countries we are deterring?

(sorry, I will try to learn the multi quote thingy)

Deterrent against other nuclear powers
 
D

Deleted member 15344

Guest
That is the same argument used by sellers of anti tiger spray in the UK.

Eh :confused:

If other countries disarmed then so would we but that's never going to happen so we have our responsibilities towards the UN and NATO and provide a nuclear deterrent towards other countries - and yes it does work because other countries know that pressing the button for them would mean the same response from us.
 

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
27,156
Location
Northumberland
Visit site
Our deterrent is small and insignificant against the one power we are really talking about, Russia. Our arsenal would not deter them. Even if it got to it I believe we need permission from the US to fire ours and if we are at that point then frankly the number of missiles they have make ours meaningless. In reality, the US and Russia are the only ones who need nukes to cancel each other out, the rest of us are doing it for ego, notable exception of Israel which is a whole different story. So, IMO we are spending billions on massaging our ego. Daft.

Have you never heard the anti tiger spray argument?
 
Top