PDA

View Full Version : Trident



Pacman1903
18-07-2016, 09:43 PM
To be renewed after an overwhelming pro renewal vote.

To be noted only one Scottish MP voted for this.

30 years more at Faslane Westminister want. Expect a battle from Krankie and her pals telling the guffs to get it to f@ck out of Scotland

10k jobs. 2k to be made by the renewal. Alot of unemployment if its binned

AberdeenArnold
18-07-2016, 10:10 PM
At a cost of 40 odd billion.

Over the lifetime of the subs. Perhaps 200 billion.

All so we can kill 100,000s of people at the click of a button.

Imagine how much good this money could and should have done.

Pacman1903
18-07-2016, 10:13 PM
At a cost of 40 odd billion.

Over the lifetime of the subs. Perhaps 200 billion.

All so we can kill 100,000s of people at the click of a button.

Imagine how much good this money could and should have done.

Nae doubting that but its a bit of a catch 22

Pacman1903
18-07-2016, 10:13 PM
At a cost of 40 odd billion.

Over the lifetime of the subs. Perhaps 200 billion.

All so we can kill 100,000s of people at the click of a button.

Imagine how much good this money could and should have done.

Nae doubting that but its a bit of a catch 22

gervaise_brookhampst
18-07-2016, 10:29 PM
Mon i subs!.....and f u c k you Scottish MPs

Barnared
18-07-2016, 11:59 PM
£200 phukin billion over its life so a miniscule percentage of the population can say they got a bit of work out of it.

Phuk off. Most pathetic argument possible.

Argue that you want England to own nuclear submarines cause that's a good thing or phuk off.

RealPompeyDon
19-07-2016, 04:58 AM
I see Theresa May's happy to press the red button, she forgot to mention the phone call to the Whitehouse, beforehand.

Aldo1983
19-07-2016, 05:58 AM
Was the job thing the reason they are renewing it?

Pacman1903
19-07-2016, 06:18 AM
They dont have anywhere else to put it. Westminister will win, 200bn will be spent and Krankie will raise her voice and act hard (because thats what she does) but it will mean f@ck all. Then you will see her drinking Pims at Wimbledon with the PM next summer

RealPompeyDon
19-07-2016, 06:39 AM
They dont have anywhere else to put it. Westminister will win, 200bn will be spent and Krankie will raise her voice and act hard (because thats what she does) but it will mean f@ck all. Then you will see her drinking Pims at Wimbledon with the PM next summer

According to a couple of mates who work in the Royal Naval Dockyard down here, it wouldn't cost a ridiculous amount to re-develop Milford Haven to accommodate them.

Aldo1983
19-07-2016, 06:45 AM
They dont have anywhere else to put it. Westminister will win, 200bn will be spent and Krankie will raise her voice and act hard (because thats what she does) but it will mean f@ck all. Then you will see her drinking Pims at Wimbledon with the PM next summer

Always wee Krankies fault.

Pacman1903
19-07-2016, 07:33 AM
Always wee Krankies fault.

Nae blaming her, just guessing what is likely to happen

Mason89
19-07-2016, 08:19 AM
I wonder where the extra jobs are coming from. They're laying folk off at an alarming rate at Faslsne just now. The civilian staff are having to reapply for their own jobs & sitting through two interviews to see if they're worth keeping

Barnared
19-07-2016, 09:11 AM
Nae blaming her, just guessing what is likely to happen

It will be entirely up to Scotland what happens next, I believe....

Barnared
19-07-2016, 09:13 AM
I wonder where the extra jobs are coming from. They're laying folk off at an alarming rate at Faslsne just now. The civilian staff are having to reapply for their own jobs & sitting through two interviews to see if they're worth keeping

Phukin loads of jobs in England.

Stupie82
19-07-2016, 09:25 AM
Take those 12K people and pay them off at £500K each, it would only cost only £6bn. Nuclear weapons are an absolute blight on the human race and have no place in the modern world. We should set a precedent by destroying every single one we have. In the event of a nuclear strike on the UK, we would be f*ked anyway and any retaliation would only further destroy human life and innocent human life at that. I personally don't see the point in using a weapon that can only be used in retaliation (UK perspective), to destroy 100,000's of innocent lives.

If that's the view of one of the leading governments in this world, then as humans, we are absolutely f*cked.

Mr_Grieves
19-07-2016, 03:07 PM
Nuclear sub's are based 32 miles from the largest city in Scotland.

If those 472 MP's are that desperate to keep Trident then they can keep them in the f*cking Thames.

The_Verninator
19-07-2016, 04:05 PM
At a cost of 40 odd billion.

Over the lifetime of the subs. Perhaps 200 billion.

All so we can kill 100,000s of people at the click of a button.

Imagine how much good this money could and should have done.

It's the sheer cost of the thing that gets me...think what could be done with that amount of money.
Then the cycle will start again when the next renewal time comes

The_Verninator
19-07-2016, 04:07 PM
According to a couple of mates who work in the Royal Naval Dockyard down here, it wouldn't cost a ridiculous amount to re-develop Milford Haven to accommodate them.

They want it stuck in "Jockland" - forgetting the maritime advantages/disadvantages of having it placed at Clyde naval base...no way do they want this in England.

I say use it or lose it..going to spend all this dosh get some fun out of it.

Start with North Korea

Then Glasgow

RealPompeyDon
19-07-2016, 05:38 PM
They want it stuck in "Jockland" - forgetting the maritime advantages/disadvantages of having it placed at Clyde naval base...no way do they want this in England.



Er, Milford Haven is in Wales.

Barnared
19-07-2016, 05:40 PM
Er, Milford Haven is in Wales.

Same phukin difference in my opinion.

The_Verninator
19-07-2016, 05:58 PM
Er, Milford Haven is in Wales.

All the same to me boyo

;D

mondo_notion
19-07-2016, 07:21 PM
The whole point of them is to act as a deterrent is it not?

Why not just get rid of them but tell everyone we have renewed them.

Everybody wins.

Aldo1983
19-07-2016, 07:40 PM
The whole point of them is to act as a deterrent is it not?

Why not just get rid of them but tell everyone we have renewed them.

Everybody wins.

That's brilliant. Maybe they have done that already and have put the money behind the bar at Westminster.

It seems to work for North Korea and even Iran. Everybody is feert of them.

Mason89
19-07-2016, 08:23 PM
My brother was a Royal Marine up there for years. Fleet protection they called it.

They spend their time playing pool, discussing the legal ways they could shoot Tommy Sheridan & bringing sheep in behind the wire, so the MOD Police have to walk miles round the perimeter fence looking for a hole that isn't there.

Buc
20-07-2016, 10:06 AM
They dont have anywhere else to put it. Westminister will win, 200bn will be spent and Krankie will raise her voice and act hard (because thats what she does) but it will mean f@ck all. Then you will see her drinking Pims at Wimbledon with the PM next summer

To be fair to the FM she's only there in support of Scotsman Andy .
I can also say she's got no time for that Westminster government. ..

I think the jobs total at faslane is 520 and quite a number come from over the border .

Not saying that jobs total if lost wouldn't be bad for the area. But I'm sure we could indeed use that area for cruise ships coming in also there's a huge amount of oil in that area we will be able to gain access to once trident has gone.
I'm hopeful that more work would indeed be created.

Here's a list of of B incidents A being millions of lives lost .
1 incident at faslane
2 at Devonport
1 in the middle of the Med.
1 off the coast of Norway.
But there's also been 100s of minor incidents.

We indeed do have enough Nuclear weapons to kill up to 320 million people you just don't target the enemy with that kind of power you kill murder millions of men women and children who have done nothing wrong ..

I believe France are thinking in getting rid of trident and they have more than we have in Scotland .
I'm all for peace I'm also a believer in life so I'm biased ..
But in saying that I can also see why countries want to have them ..not that I agree with it.

Buc
20-07-2016, 10:15 AM
That's brilliant. Maybe they have done that already and have put the money behind the bar at Westminster.

It seems to work for North Korea and even Iran. Everybody is feert of them.

Wouldn't surprise me if the government are just saying what they are doing in scare tactics they are world beaters at that.
I think North Korea are said to have only 10 .

Here's the list of numbers

USA. 7200.
Russia 7500.
Scotland 215.
France 300.
China 260.
India . 110-120.
Pakistan 120-130.
North Korea 10.

Most countries don't have look at how wealthy Norway are and they haven't got any either they can well afford .

Buc
20-07-2016, 10:23 AM
A we Linky as regards jobs.


http://www.nuclearinfo.org/article/uk-trident-operational-berths/ministry-defence-reveals-just-520-faslane-jobs-depend-trident

Pacman1903
20-07-2016, 10:50 AM
So wgat was the news on about 10k for

Barnared
20-07-2016, 11:10 AM
So wgat was the news on about 10k for

Cause they all support the government, regardless.

Stupie82
20-07-2016, 11:41 AM
Carl Sagan got it right when he said " The nuclear arms race is like two sworn enemies standing waist deep in Gasoline, one with 3 matches and the other with 5".

The argument that it is a deterrent is completely flawed IMO. It will only take a nutter or a mad man to launch a nuclear attack in the first place, therefore who is it a deterrent to exactly? Anyone who launches one of these weapons doesn't care about the consequences they create.

IMO,They are a completely useless weapon unless used to create terror. Using them in "defence" will only lead to terror and the loss of many more innocent lives, and for what? revenge? I personally cant see why any country needs them, but while some have them and refuse to get rid of them, I guess they will always exist. One of these days this world will again see destruction caused by a nuclear bomb and that alone is a terrifying thought.

Barnared
20-07-2016, 11:43 AM
Carl Sagan got it right when he said " The nuclear arms race is like two sworn enemies standing waist deep in Gasoline, one with 3 matches and the other with 5".

The argument that it is a deterrent is completely flawed IMO. It will only take a nutter or a mad man to launch a nuclear attack in the first place, therefore who is it a deterrent to exactly? Anyone who launches one of these weapons doesn't care about the consequences they create.

IMO,They are a completely useless weapon unless used to create terror. Using them in "defence" will only lead to terror and the loss of many more innocent lives, and for what? revenge? I personally cant see why any country needs them, but while some have them and refuse to get rid of them, I guess they will always exist. One of these days this world will again see destruction caused by a nuclear bomb and that alone is a terrifying thought.

I really like that

Aldo1983
20-07-2016, 11:57 AM
There was an arguement during the referendum about how many jobs there actually are then it transpired that the number of Scottish based workers was very low.

As for the weapons themselves, how many of the UKs nukes are based there? Is it all of them? I wonder where France, the US and Russia keep theirs?

Buc
20-07-2016, 12:23 PM
So wgat was the news on about 10k for

I bet that wasn't on CH 4 news
The BBC is indeed run by the government never watch it.

Buc
20-07-2016, 12:28 PM
Here's the cake slice of percentages.

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues/february-digital-issue/last-weeks-poll-renewing-trident/



Edit to say its a couple of years since that link 100bn in 2014 to a now more mindbogglingly 205bn

What will it really be 2020.

Stupie82
20-07-2016, 12:51 PM
Here's the cake slice of percentages.

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues/february-digital-issue/last-weeks-poll-renewing-trident/



Edit to say its a couple of years since that link 100bn in 2014 to a now more mindbogglingly 205bn

What will it really be 2020.

Now come one, that doesn't matter... you cant put a price tag on "safety" ;-)

well.. clearly you can put one on stupidity and waste though!

Barnared
20-07-2016, 12:56 PM
You're right Stupie. If some phukin retard called Mohammed is chasing after me wi an axe, I wanna know that May or Boris are standing there ready to press the button.

Buc
20-07-2016, 01:03 PM
Now come one, that doesn't matter... you cant put a price tag on "safety" ;-)

well.. clearly you can put one on stupidity and waste though!

A price tag on safety I've mentioned the 5 cat B incidents now that isn't safety ..

I'd rather we spent that money on the people who are being kept away from the drugs they really need to keep them not only in good health but in some cases alive .
Its not the government who should have voted for it it should have been up to the people of this country in an ideal world which I know it isn't.
Out of curiosity Stupie would you press the button and kill millions of woman and children let's not also forget about the suffering in the aftermath of such an event ..
A kid here is no different from a kid anywhere else in the world .
I'm sure you'd also agree suffering is horrible to witness in anyone.

Buc
20-07-2016, 01:06 PM
Interesting read


http://www.cnduk.org/campaigns/global-abolition/effects-of-nuclear-weapons

Stupie82
20-07-2016, 02:34 PM
A price tag on safety I've mentioned the 5 cat B incidents now that isn't safety ..

I'd rather we spent that money on the people who are being kept away from the drugs they really need to keep them not only in good health but in some cases alive .
Its not the government who should have voted for it it should have been up to the people of this country in an ideal world which I know it isn't.
Out of curiosity Stupie would you press the button and kill millions of woman and children let's not also forget about the suffering in the aftermath of such an event ..
A kid here is no different from a kid anywhere else in the world .
I'm sure you'd also agree suffering is horrible to witness in anyone.

I must apologise Buc, im not sure my sarcasm was picked up on my post above. Just to be clear, I am 100% against nuclear weapons in general, weapon systems as a whole and any trident system in this country. They will never be used, which makes them a complete waste of public cash and the do not deter anyone mad enough to use them.

Pacman1903
20-07-2016, 03:47 PM
I wonder how much money is brought to the local economy from workers at Faslane. If trident went would it cripple the community?

Buc
20-07-2016, 04:06 PM
I wonder how much money is brought to the local economy from workers at Faslane. If trident went would it cripple the community?

The thing is it would be tough but I'm sure with money saved from getting rid of trident we can spend that vast sums on giving that area life and I'm sure plenty of it ..
Such a stunning place to live as well I'm sure the tourist industry would bring even more life as well as maybe introducing wildlife back into that area ..there's loads you can do .. Anyway removing trident doesn't happen overnight be at least 2 years thats plenty time time to
Get other businesses up and running

Brian Grantland
20-07-2016, 04:22 PM
I wonder how much money is brought to the local economy from workers at Faslane. If trident went would it cripple the community?

Keynesian multiplier is oft times difficult to quantify

However, unless there was significant investment (from let's face it government cos it'd be hard to imagine businesses sprouting up or locating there) it wouldn't be hard to imagine it being like Ayrshire's ex-mining areas.
Devastated.

Brian Grantland
20-07-2016, 04:24 PM
The thing is it would be tough but I'm sure with money saved from getting rid of trident we can spend that vast sums on giving that area life and I'm sure plenty of it ..
Such a stunning place to live as well I'm sure the tourist industry would bring even more life as well as maybe introducing wildlife back into that area ..there's loads you can do .. Anyway removing trident doesn't happen overnight be at least 2 years thats plenty time time to
Get other businesses up and running

It would need to be significant sizes of business to replace the job losses and other revenue streams.
It legitimately needs an industry and those are hard to create in 2 years...

Buc
20-07-2016, 04:35 PM
It would need to be significant sizes of business to replace the job losses and other revenue streams.
It legitimately needs an industry and those are hard to create in 2 years...

Not sure about that Brian
I created a business in a week with the right backing they will succeed the government would have to back it and back it fast I'm sure they (Scottish government) have indeed plans .

Mason89
20-07-2016, 04:39 PM
The new Waitrose in Helensburgh would be a possible casualty.

I don't think it would make much difference to the local community to be honest. That whole area is for retired folk and yachties. It would hit Dumbarton & the Vale harder.

Buc
20-07-2016, 04:43 PM
The new Waitrose in Helensburgh would be a possible casualty.

I don't think it would make much difference to the local community to be honest. That whole area is for retired folk and yachties. It would hit Dumbarton & the Vale harder.

There's a huge pensioner community living there for sure but not sure of the actual figures .

That's one thing I've noticed on my cycling visits to that area .

Brian Grantland
20-07-2016, 04:45 PM
Not sure about that Brian
I created a business in a week with the right backing they will succeed the government would have to back it and back it fast I'm sure they (Scottish government) have indeed plans .

A business, cam be set up in a week, of course.
But an industry cannot.

A few small businesses will not fill the gap of a major employer.

How many employees did you have at day 1?

Buc
20-07-2016, 04:53 PM
A business, cam be set up in a week, of course.
But an industry cannot.

A few small businesses will not fill the gap of a major employer.

How many employees did you have at day 1?

Me but within a year I had about 10 by year 2 we were a very good sized company hence retirement at 50.

Now I just rent properties near Aberdeen uni .

Aldo1983
20-07-2016, 04:54 PM
I'm sure the Government made the decision on the back of made up jobs and the local community.

Buc
20-07-2016, 04:55 PM
I'm sure the Government made the decision on the back of made up jobs and the local community.

They sure did ..surprised these guys aren't aware of that :O

Barnared
20-07-2016, 05:07 PM
I wonder how much money is brought to the local economy from workers at Faslane. If trident went would it cripple the community?

It would probably depend on whether all the Faslsne workers are real local folk. The very small local community existed before trident, didn't it?

By the way, eurotim says your on this thread too much :)

Mason89
20-07-2016, 05:11 PM
The workers tend to come from outside, as despite picking up obscene amounts of cash for doing f*ck all, they still can't afford to live in Helensburgh.

Don't know how long for though as I said earlier, they are laying them off in significant numbers. Perhaps all these extra jobs that were promised, could be them passing interviews for the jobs the already have?

Buc
20-07-2016, 05:47 PM
The workers tend to come from outside, as despite picking up obscene amounts of cash for doing f*ck all, they still can't afford to live in Helensburgh.

Don't know how long for though as I said earlier, they are laying them off in significant numbers. Perhaps all these extra jobs that were promised, could be them passing interviews for the jobs the already have?

I know a lass from Helensburgh she said there's loads of folk that come over the border to work there and come the weekend they mostly go home .although I can't confirm that statement.

Aldo1983
20-07-2016, 06:08 PM
To be fair I know a lass from Cardross and she thinks it would hit the area hard. Although she also works there.

Id use that land for growing mushrooms. Apparently it's ideal land for it.

Mason89
20-07-2016, 06:34 PM
To be fair I know a lass from Cardross and she thinks it would hit the area hard. Although she also works there.

Id use that land for growing mushrooms. Apparently it's ideal land for it.

How does she pronounce that place she's from? Car 'dross' or Car 'driss'?

mondo_notion
20-07-2016, 06:47 PM
Where would the hippies go? Always used to look out for the peace camp when I was younger visiting family down there.

Buc
20-07-2016, 06:59 PM
Where would the hippies go? Always used to look out for the peace camp when I was younger visiting family down there.

Back to tree hugging buc included .:)minus any dope of course

mondo_notion
20-07-2016, 07:04 PM
Back to tree hugging buc included .:)minus any dope of course

Not minus the soap though I would hope ;D

Buc
20-07-2016, 07:43 PM
Not minus the soap though I would hope ;D

You are right minus the soap you can't do much washing up the top of a tree :)

Buc
20-07-2016, 07:46 PM
I'm sure fellow posters on here would like to join us.


http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/wind-power-supplies-97-electricity-needs-scottish-households-2015.html

mondo_notion
20-07-2016, 08:15 PM
I'm sure fellow posters on here would like to join us.


http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/wind-power-supplies-97-electricity-needs-scottish-households-2015.html

That can't be right can it? "wind turbines created enough electricity to meet the needs of 97% of Scottish households last year"

Doesn't sound right.

Barnared
20-07-2016, 09:11 PM
Why not? Scotland supplies much more electricity to the UK grid than it generates purely for it's own consumption. "Better together" remember.

The answer is no though, that statement is false. At certain points in the year Scotland produces way more than it uses and certainly wind can power Scotland alone at peaks but the Scottish government's target off 100% by 2020 will not be met as things stand. The westmonster machine is putting a stop to that.

We are currently on course to achieve between 85-87% by 2020. That is of total Scottish consumption.

Buc
21-07-2016, 05:57 AM
I'm sure fellow posters on here would like to join us.


http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/wind-power-supplies-97-electricity-needs-scottish-households-2015.html

Mondo what about this ..


http://www.sdi.co.uk/invest/sectors/renewables

Buc
21-07-2016, 07:23 AM
I feel its just a matter if time


http://stv.tv/news/west-central/1361272-faslane-nuclear-attack-submarine-damaged-in-collision/

Pacman1903
21-07-2016, 08:10 AM
I feel its just a matter if time


http://stv.tv/news/west-central/1361272-faslane-nuclear-attack-submarine-damaged-in-collision/

Ha ha "world leading sensors".

Have to like its name though, HMS Ambush, sounds hard, i wonder what its sister ships are called?

I could easily name warships

HMS Onslaught, HMS Massacre, HMS Bloodbath,HMS Annihilator, HMS Immolation

Go on MOD geez a job

Mason89
21-07-2016, 08:30 AM
You can't just go naming things after your record collection

Pacman1903
21-07-2016, 08:42 AM
You can't just go naming things after your record collection

I was wondering if anyone would notice :D

Barnared
21-07-2016, 08:55 AM
I feel its just a matter if time


http://stv.tv/news/west-central/1361272-faslane-nuclear-attack-submarine-damaged-in-collision/
Aye, right on q

Pacman1903
21-07-2016, 09:01 AM
Aye, right on q

Totally, you have to laugh

Pacman1903
21-07-2016, 12:38 PM
http://i67.tinypic.com/21o79qe.jpg

It will buff out

Stupie82
21-07-2016, 02:09 PM
Luckily it didn't penetrate the sub too deep then. A sub like that sinking with a nuclear arsenal on board, wouldn't exactly be ideal for the government.

Whats even more frightening is how these weapons are just transported around the country openly. A couple of pics below :


680

681

Obviously very well protected, but scary to think you could be driving behind one of these things on the road.

Aldo1983
21-07-2016, 02:21 PM
What's the likelihood of one of them going off though? Plus if one rolled off and blew up then I'd rather be behind it than 35miles away.

Stupie82
21-07-2016, 02:27 PM
What's the likelihood of one of them going off though? Plus if one rolled off and blew up then I'd rather be behind it than 35miles away.

The likelihood is probably zero, but nonetheless, to have something that is classed as the most catastrophic weapon known to man, just in the back of lorry and being transported up the M6 is frightening.

Barnared
21-07-2016, 02:51 PM
The likelihood is probably zero, but nonetheless, to have something that is classed as the most catastrophic weapon known to man, just in the back of lorry and being transported up the M6 is frightening.

Then smashing into fishing boats in a disputed territory in the Mediterranean....

Buc
21-07-2016, 03:45 PM
http://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/uk-nuclear-weapons-catastrophe-making



An insight on what could happen :(

Jupiter
21-07-2016, 05:35 PM
The likelihood is probably zero, but nonetheless, to have something that is classed as the most catastrophic weapon known to man, just in the back of lorry and being transported up the M6 is frightening.

You're being paranoid, they won't have a complete active nuke in one truck.

mondo_notion
21-07-2016, 05:38 PM
You're being paranoid, they won't have a complete active nuke in one truck.

That's exactly what they want you to think!

Buc
21-07-2016, 07:38 PM
Here's a rather harrowing cartoon of the events in Hiroshima.

https://youtu.be/lBZsYceH4nM

Mason89
21-07-2016, 08:12 PM
My mates on that sub. Says it was very lucky not to have sunk

Stupie82
21-07-2016, 08:22 PM
My mates on that sub. Says it was very lucky not to have sunk

I cant imagine rescuing folk from a sunken sub is an easy task at all, let alone one loaded with ready to use nukes on board. Its lucky it didnt sink and even luckier it didnt happen in another nations waters.

Stupie82
21-07-2016, 08:32 PM
http://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/uk-nuclear-weapons-catastrophe-making



An insight on what could happen :(

Very sad animation.

To think that bomb had a yield of 15Kt and the Tsar Bomba tested by the Russians had a yield of 50Mt... 1570 x more powerful. Goodness what they have in stock these days.

Jupiter
21-07-2016, 09:03 PM
I cant imagine rescuing folk from a sunken sub is an easy task at all, let alone one loaded with ready to use nukes on board. Its lucky it didnt sink and even luckier it didnt happen in another nations waters.

It doesn't have nuclear bombs on board, it is only powered by a nuclear reactor. Big difference.

Redtothebone
22-07-2016, 01:34 AM
Any one who thinks nuclear destruction is option is dead already.

Redtothebone
22-07-2016, 01:41 AM
Any one who thinks nuclear destruction is a option is dead already.

Redtothebone
22-07-2016, 01:42 AM
double post still ture

Buc
22-07-2016, 05:36 AM
double post still ture

Good ploy mention it twice for it to stick ..
Its barbaric no other word for it.
Life destroying at a biblical scale ..:(

Brian Grantland
22-07-2016, 11:45 AM
double post still ture

drink was taken last evening wasn't it