Posted on 05/15/2010 9:09:29 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Because of opposition from the Liberal Democrats to the program, Britain's new government will revisit the costs of replacing the Trident nuclear deterrent. Once first results trickled in, it was clear that Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg would be the kingmaker. And he was. Now the junior partner in a coalition with Prime Minister David Cameron's Conservatives, Clegg will try to leave a mark in British politics over the next years.
There is hardly any issue on which both parties are so starkly apart than military spending.
While the Conservatives have accused Gordon Brown's Labor government of underfunding the armed forces, the Liberal Democrats not only voted against the Iraq war, they want to further downsize the military budget.
A key issue is Britain's nuclear deterrent, a submarine-launched missile system called Trident.
The renewal of Trident was agreed in 2007 and is due by 2024. Yet in light of constrained budgets, the expensive program is being hotly debated.
While the Conservatives in their campaign supported the full renewal of Trident, the Lib Dems said they would want to come up with an alternative and cheaper way to defend Britain.
Both parties in their coalition agreement stopped short from making any concrete go or no-go statements; yet the strategic defense review that is to begin soon is expected to at least closely scrutinize the $32 billion program
(Excerpt) Read more at spacedaily.com ...
Junior Partner my eye, all the reports seem to indicate that Cameron wanted the PM job so badly that he gave Clegg everything he wanted - and more!
If they had an alternative and cheaper way to defend Britain, they would announce it. Liberals are big on words and finding problems; they are small on actions and solutions.
So the ‘conservatives’ over there are more anti-military than the liberals? Boy are they screwed.
While I understand the desire of Conservatives to maintain a nuclear arsenal, I must point out that unless Britain gets serious about immigration, we will have an Islamic country armed with the Trident system soon.
Personally, I really think that no action will be taken. The four Vanguard missile submarines are an essential part of our SIOP to attack Russia in case of a nuclear attack.The four Vanguard submarines could strike a maximum of 512 separate targets; this is equivalent to 7% of the total U.S. nuclear strike capacity. However, these submarines are under UK control.
Cameron gave away the store to the Lib Dems. The Tories are finished. Watch how fast many Tories jump to the UKIP now.
I say we force the Brits to disarm nuclear wise. The country will fall into the hands of the islamists before the century ends. It’s inescapable and we don’t need a nuclear armed nation ed by muslim fanatics.
And how are you going to do that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.