Trident failure

The reason that they hide what had happened was nothing what so ever to do with national security, but everything to do with a vote on trident renewal. They should be ashamed.

I've been waiting for someone to tell me how important it is we have a deterrent and nobody has. Are they just burying their heads, or having second thoughts?

I do think it is important that we have a deterrent especially when you have people like Putin but it was one part which failed not the whole thing from what I have seen. They have never been tested frequently - only every few years. These things have worked before.

Tested every four years.
The point is that the last test was in June, just before the vote. May knew about it; otherwise she would have said on the Marr show.
The Trident vote was on a false premise, that Trident was safe.

If I lived in Florida, I would be very worried.
What's the point of having a deterrent that does not do what it says?
US forces don't seem to mind collateral damage if it happens on other country's soil. On their own soil, it might be different.
No warheads involved this time. The next time? Trump in charge?

Surely UK would de die if warheads were involved. I also think it very unlikely that the UK would be the first to press the button and I would hope it never came to anyone doing it - but while you have it it is always a background threat making other leaders more wary.

but while you have it it is always a background threat making other leaders more wary.

I have never been able to find any logic in the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) doctrine. Not even when we had lectures on it at Uni and I had to write a seminar paper about it! It's utterly bonkers. It assumes that everyone is going to play by the rules.

What happens when someone doesn't? What about ISIS who think that all infidels have to die and when they (ISIS members)die in the service of jihad there'll be 70 virgins waiting for them in heaven... Really they'd be doing everyone a good turn to obliterate most of the human race, wouldn't they? Half jolly well deserve to die anyway and the other half get their reward in heaven...

Can it even be called a 'deterrent' when you can't be certain which way it will go if you fire it? Watch out we have our weapons aimed at you! (but actually it might go the other way so everyone should take cover!)

Julian Lewis, the Tory chair of the defence committee, called for somebody to be sacked over the controversy.

Lewis told broadcasters: “This sort of event is not one you can play both ways. These tests are routine but infrequent in this country. Whenever they work, which is 99% of the time, film is released of them working, so whichever person decided they wanted to draw a veil over one that didn’t work should have been sacked. You have always got to assume that something like this will come out.

“This test went wrong in June when it was a question of David Cameron and his team being at No 10. They evidently decided to cover this matter up.

“The only way she could have disclosed this matter would have been to point the finger of accusation against her predecessor for covering it up. So a tricky situation, but on the whole I think if she did know – which she probably did – she should have spoken up.”

I assume Julian Lewis is on her side, usually, but not in this.

The head of GCHQ has stood down.
A coincidence?

The Americans are allowed to know about it, but not us. Michael Fallon has refused to say what happened.

edition.cnn.com/2017/01/23/europe/trident-missile-failure-theresa-may/index.html
He's making it worse for May, not better.

Even if you believe in the concept of muscle flexing and MAD it doesn't make sense that we have to pay for it when the USA have control of the button. We're paying for the privilege of being on the front line.

Put yourself in Trump's head brain. Come it's not hard. There is isn't much there because his second, much larger brain, is in his groin. 'Hmmm,' he thinks to himself, 'I have two choices. First of all (remember he speaks American), I could attack the enemy with the nukes in North and South Dakota but that would mean the enemy would fire back at the good 'ol US of A. Bummer that doesn't sound good. The enemy might attack Washington and I'm here. Second of all (remember American speak), I could fire off the Brit's missiles. Then the enemy will attack them. Serves them right for founding this great country in the first place then daring to try to tax us.

Result. Great Britain is bombed to oblivion. A few enemy cities are bombed to oblivion but not the capital city because we want to be able to draw up a treaty before the US is at real risk. Shame about the Brits but collateral damage is the price we pay for keeping the USA free.

Thanks, vampirequeen, but I'd really rather not.

"During the debate on the renewal of the Trident system last July, Theresa May said that she would be willing to 'press the nuclear button' to launch a missile that would kill 100,000 people. What she omitted to tell MPs - and the public - is that those 100,000 people might well have been you or me, given that she knew beyond doubt, because it had just happened, that Trident could simply veer off course, then explode somewhere other than it was meant to, if the auto-destruct should fail.

While the media got its knickers in a twist about Corbyn's honest answer that he would not 'press the button', Mrs May was busy hiding undeniably relevant facts from Parliament and from the British people.

Which is all very illuminating about the mores of Tory politicians and the UK's media. Not quite as illuminating as a nuclear flash, though.

Oops, sorry Florida."

Don't want to be in May's head either.
Real 1984, Airstrip one, isn't it, as you said.
I got laughed at for saying that on another thread. Perhaps we'd better not think about what might happen, just in case.... Much better to bury our heads in the sand. Keep the television off and the radio off, so we can't hear the four minute warning.
Just listening to Spicer at the moment. He has such a boring voice, I'm surprised most of the press corps aren't asleep already.

Michael Fallon;
The Trident test was an operational success ..... but you might want to rethink your holiday plans.

Theresa May;
Of course I'd kill 100,000 people.....and I'm not too fussy which 100,000 people.

Tested every four years, and on The Daily Politics it was said that there have been over a hundred testings, so one failed unarmed missile isn't bad going.
Even if Parliament had been told before the the vote it wouldn't have made any difference...you either believe that we should have nuclear missiles or you don't.
It was decided that we do.

dj your post 19.15?!

If there's a one in a hundred chance of something going wrong, it doesn't mean that it won't go wrong twice in a row.

Are you saying it's okay for them to tell us every time it goes right, which they do, but not when it goes wrong? So much for open government.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2017/01/23/commons-speaker-john-bercow-calls-michael-fallon-stupid-in-trident-row-julian-lewis_n_14341704.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

The speaker is leaving soon anyway.

Mind you the self destruct button worked correctly when the engaged that - so not a total failure. I wonder if they have ever needed to fire that for real before.

We have tested the Trident since 1994, eight tests in all.
Every other test has been reported, including one in 2012.
Every test there was someone from the ministry or department of defence on board.
Minister for defence in 2012 was Philip Hammond. When that test happened, Michael Fallon was secretary of state for business.
He must have known that the ministry of defence put out a press statement then.

As I said before, they have told us every time it went right, but not when it went wrong. That cannot be acceptable.

Maybe this is really part of a deep dark plan to stop Trump pushing the button, because he can't be sure where any missile will finish up. Might be Russia, might be Florida- oh Hell! he'd probably rather it was Florida!!!

Or Mexico.

Does any other country publicly say when a test of this kind goes wrong? Surely it's something to keep quiet to the world about, why make a big announcement?
The military will have told the PM, and why should it go any further?Before somebody says 'transparency' how is it in the general public's interest to know, and if the whole of Parliament is told, then the workd knows too.
This missile wasn't armed, it was a test.
It made no difference to MP's who were deciding to keep/not keep Trident.
Your post at 19.15.16 djen is what exactly, a bad joke?

I think this obsession with transparency can be a dangerous thing when too many statistics are made public. Do countries like Russia publish these figures?

Well, now we know, roses, who do you suggest should be the next Minister for Defence to go aboard the nuclear sub when it has its next test?
I can't imagine they'll be queuing up to be the next minister.
2020, the next test.
After they have been tested, they then return to Scotland to be armed with warheads. I am sure they would feel much happier if they knew the missiles worked properly.

Welshwife, we had French Exocet missiles before Trident. The French wanted the UK and France to cooperate again in the future. Can't see much chance of that now.

If she's got any political acumen now's the chance to put a hold on Trident until a full report is out on this incident. That should see out her government and put the onus on the next/her successor to decide

Anya I agree. That's what a sensible person would do. Do you think Mrs May reads GN? She should!

Apparently this was only the fifth time Trident had been tested. Fifth. It cost so many millions each time it's fired we just can't afford it. So we have a missile we can't use or the other side will obliterate our little island, costs far more than we can afford to make - or test properly, and will probably be obsolete by the time we can afford to actually get it. How silly is that.