Daily Mail: Britain's submarines could sail without any Trident warheads, claims Jeremy Corbyn
* Labour leader said the idea was one which his party review would consider
* Corbyn supports Britain unilaterally giving up nuclear weapons altogether
* But Government said remarks show Labour is a national security 'threat'
Britain could put nuclear submarines to sea without them carrying any Trident warheads, Jeremy Corbyn has suggested.
The Labour leader - who wants Britain to scrap its nuclear weapons - said it was one of the options which would be reviewed by shadow defence secretary Emily Thornberry in a party review.
Tensions are high within Labour as a majority of MPs want the party to keep its existing policy of supporting the renewal of Britain's nuclear deterrent with the purchase of four new submarines.
WNU Editor: Members of his won party are rebelling against this idea .... Corbyn proposal for nuclear-free Trident triggers Labour row (Irish Times).
More News On U.K. Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn's Remarks That Britain's Trident Submarines May Sail Without Nuclear Weapons
Corbyn: UK could keep Trident submarines but without warheads -- BBC
Jeremy Corbyn says he would keep submarines patrolling the world without any nuclear weapons -- The Telegraph
Jeremy Corbyn hints at no-nuke subs in Trident compromise -- The Guardian
British Labour Leader Offers Compromise on Trident Program -- New York Times
Trident submarines could be built with no nuclear weapons on board under idea considered by Jeremy Corbyn -- Mirror
Corbyn: Trident Subs 'Don't Need' Warheads -- SKY News
Corbyn suggests stripping nuclear submarines of their weapons -- The National
5 comments:
laprascopic lobotomy>
WNU Editor,
Everything Corbyn say's, plans or does triggers a "Labour Party" row.
The Party of Blair and Brown is pissed that the Labour Party Membership, put someone who adhere's to actual Labour Party ideals, in charge, rather than another Neo-Thatcherite.
The Purges, Coups and Show Trials have barely started.
Corbyn's position however is sound. The British Nuclear Deterrent's key purpose was to enshure that the US would hold to it's NATO commitments against the Soviet Union, by nuking Moscow. ( the same reason the French Force du Frappe exists). Moscow of course, really wasn't going to care which NATO member nuked it, given their small number, the British Nukes were always more about blackmailing the US, than "defending" Britian.
In a era when the RN is sailing Aircraft Carriers with out aircraft, the British Army still hasn't replaced equiptment losses from Iraq and Afghan deployments, and the RAF can only deploy 16 Torado's and 4 Eurofighters to OIR,
Wouldn't the money be better spent elsewhere?
The Brits need to reassess everything. They do not have the funds nor the willingness to sacrifice their priorities in order to have a robust military. Hence current policy .... being what it is is .... has resulted in a military adrift and without the resources to contemplate even a minimal deployment in a serious war-zone.
Very sad!
WNU Editor,
As one British Economist pointed out, the solution is simple.
If Britian euthanizes everyone over 55 who is retired, and seizes all their assets, and euthanizes every one under 16,
( they can always make more babies)
The British military can be rebuilt to the strength it was before Afghanistan and Iraq, in as little as 5 years.
Post a Comment