More nukes

[Bird on a Fire]

UK planning to increase its nuclear stockpile from 180 to 260 warheads.
https://www.icanw.org/uk_to_increase_nu ... pile_limit

An excellent use of the public money that's apparently too scarce to fund schools, nurses, disabled people, etc etc.

[lpm]

GOT TO DEFEND OURSELVES FROM NORTH KOREA which was an actual argument used on a forum not dissimilar to this one.

[Woodchopper]

Yes, I was planning on starting a thread.

Its a retrograde step. While they hadn't disarmed, until recently the nuclear armed states had gradually reduced the number of their nuclear weapons. Disarmament was slow but things were moving in the right direction.

Over the last few years we've seen the breakdown of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty (which covered nuclear weapons in Europe), modernization by the US, Russia bringing in completely new types of nuclear weapon, and now the UK announcement.

As well as everything else people should start worrying about nuclear war again.

Imagine, a room, awash in gasoline. And there are two implacable enemies in that room. One of them has 9,000 matches. The other has 7,000 matches. Each of them is concerned about who’s ahead, who’s stronger. Well, that's the kind of situation we are actually in.

[Fishnut]

As someone who was too young to really appreciate the threat of nuclear war that the world faced in the mid/late 20th century it's always seemed like one of those things which have had their day and are no longer a real issue. Clearly I was being overly optimistic and rather naive.

[sideshowjim]

Any ideas of the purpose of it? Nuclear posturing seems a bit pointless outside of a cold-war scenario, and what the hell can you do with 260 warheads that you can't do with 200?

My uninformed guesses:

1. Post brexit desperate attempts to make ourselves seem more important
2. Trying to make the Americans like us again after apparent support for Cheeto Musolini
3. Some other countries are updating their big explodey things and therefore we should as well
4. 3-for-2 never to be repeated offer at Aldermaston
5. Worry that the US is going to go full-on ethno-religious lunatic post-coup in the next decade or so and it might get a bit "end of Mice and Men"
6. Vague attempt to make Russia piss off / go bankrupt again trying to keep up
7. Get some good headlines and shore up the vote from the "everything on my Amazon wishlist features the word Tactical" crowd

[Gfamily]

I heard something about a claim that "their use would be justified against a country that was behind a catastrophic cyber attack", which obviously isn't going to be very overt. So we're back in the realms of 'dodgy dossiers'.

[headshot]

Any ideas of the purpose of it? Nuclear posturing seems a bit pointless outside of a cold-war scenario, and what the hell can you do with 260 warheads that you can't do with 200?

My uninformed guesses:

1. Post brexit desperate attempts to make ourselves seem more important
2. Trying to make the Americans like us again after apparent support for Cheeto Musolini
3. Some other countries are updating their big explodey things and therefore we should as well
4. 3-for-2 never to be repeated offer at Aldermaston
5. Worry that the US is going to go full-on ethno-religious lunatic post-coup in the next decade or so and it might get a bit "end of Mice and Men"
6. Vague attempt to make Russia piss off / go bankrupt again trying to keep up
7. Get some good headlines and shore up the vote from the "everything on my Amazon wishlist features the word Tactical" crowd

8. Jobs for the Scots. Head off independence.

[Bird on a Fire]

Unlikely, as the Scottish government is opposed to more nukes and wants to ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons https://www.nuclearban.scot/

If Scotland is forced to host even more nukes it'll just be yet more evidence of the democratic deficit, and a pretty obvious and uncontroversial issue to rally around.

[Trinucleus]

As someone who was too young to really appreciate the threat of nuclear war that the world faced in the mid/late 20th century it's always seemed like one of those things which have had their day and are no longer a real issue. Clearly I was being overly optimistic and rather naive.

They way it worked was that we had nukes to stop the evil USSR invading western Europe, and the
USSR had nukes to stop the evil US invading Eastern Europe. So no-one was actually planning to invade anyone, but the boys had loads of toys to pay with, and the politicians had a handy bogeyman to keep the citizens in line

[tom p]

Any ideas of the purpose of it? Nuclear posturing seems a bit pointless outside of a cold-war scenario, and what the hell can you do with 260 warheads that you can't do with 200?

My uninformed guesses:

1. Post brexit desperate attempts to make ourselves seem more important
2. Trying to make the Americans like us again after apparent support for Cheeto Musolini
3. Some other countries are updating their big explodey things and therefore we should as well
4. 3-for-2 never to be repeated offer at Aldermaston
5. Worry that the US is going to go full-on ethno-religious lunatic post-coup in the next decade or so and it might get a bit "end of Mice and Men"
6. Vague attempt to make Russia piss off / go bankrupt again trying to keep up
7. Get some good headlines and shore up the vote from the "everything on my Amazon wishlist features the word Tactical" crowd

8. Jobs for the Scots. Head off independence.

low-rent political trap for labour: are they NOT in favour of defending our great nation?

[sideshowjim]

Any ideas of the purpose of it? Nuclear posturing seems a bit pointless outside of a cold-war scenario, and what the hell can you do with 260 warheads that you can't do with 200?

My uninformed guesses:

1. Post brexit desperate attempts to make ourselves seem more important
2. Trying to make the Americans like us again after apparent support for Cheeto Musolini
3. Some other countries are updating their big explodey things and therefore we should as well
4. 3-for-2 never to be repeated offer at Aldermaston
5. Worry that the US is going to go full-on ethno-religious lunatic post-coup in the next decade or so and it might get a bit "end of Mice and Men"
6. Vague attempt to make Russia piss off / go bankrupt again trying to keep up
7. Get some good headlines and shore up the vote from the "everything on my Amazon wishlist features the word Tactical" crowd

8. Jobs for the Scots. Head off independence.

Did not think of that one!

[JQH]

As someone who was too young to really appreciate the threat of nuclear war that the world faced in the mid/late 20th century it's always seemed like one of those things which have had their day and are no longer a real issue. Clearly I was being overly optimistic and rather naive.

I grew up knowing that nuclear annihilation was a a real possibility. There were plenty of political crises on the news which could blow up into the big one too. Fun times.

[Little waster]

Any ideas of the purpose of it? Nuclear posturing seems a bit pointless outside of a cold-war scenario, and what the hell can you do with 260 warheads that you can't do with 200?

Make 260 radioactive holes in the Russian steppe rather than just 200, obv. Who can put a price on that?

Meanwhile here's Sir Humphrey still being relevant.

[plodder]

As someone who was too young to really appreciate the threat of nuclear war that the world faced in the mid/late 20th century it's always seemed like one of those things which have had their day and are no longer a real issue. Clearly I was being overly optimistic and rather naive.

There's a whole generation of people who don't know what actual existential dread of imminent catastrophe feels like, but yet feel existential dread about not-imminent future catastrophe all the time. They're going to sh.t themselves, poor bastards.

[lpm]

Humans interpret the world through the stories we tell.

There was a vaguely plausible story back then, with billions of Red Army tanks storming across western Europe and taking Calais within 48 hours. There was a narrative where the UK needed nukes: firstly to deter this scenario, secondly to tactically nuke tanks in the Fulda Gap or similar, thirdly to wipe out the Soviets under the better dead than red concept.

There simply isn't a story we can tell in 2021. All that's left is "Britain is best" fantasies.

The narrative of nukes instead of nurses is a stronger storyline - equally fanciful as it is - which means Johnson isn't going to get the popularist boost he thinks. He has really poor instincts for popularism. God help us if he ever cottons on to giving the proles tax breaks and paying nurses more.

[Woodchopper]

Make 260 radioactive holes in the Russian steppe rather than just 200, obv. Who can put a price on that?

Meanwhile here's Sir Humphrey still being relevant.

And these installments have aged remarkably well:

https://youtu.be/9KId-GgDcGk

https://youtu.be/1OitCT1KT4k

https://youtu.be/IKQlQlQ6_pk

https://youtu.be/o861Ka9TtT4

[lpm]

Make 260 radioactive holes in the Russian steppe rather than just 200, obv. Who can put a price on that?

Meanwhile here's Sir Humphrey still being relevant. 8-)

And these installments have aged remarkably well:

https://youtu.be/9KId-GgDcGk

https://youtu.be/1OitCT1KT4k

https://youtu.be/IKQlQlQ6_pk

https://youtu.be/o861Ka9TtT4

I still use "But what if I was to get drunk" when setting up processes - how to deal with stupid/rogue actions is important.

And I use salami tactics professionally as well, sometimes you can't make all the change you want. And seeing it used by others, such as the disaster of the salami slice-by-slice unlockdown last summer - know the tactic and you can forecast the series.

[Blackcountryboy]

As someone who was too young to really appreciate the threat of nuclear war that the world faced in the mid/late 20th century it's always seemed like one of those things which have had their day and are no longer a real issue. Clearly I was being overly optimistic and rather naive.

I grew up knowing that nuclear annihilation was a a real possibility. There were plenty of political crises on the news which could blow up into the big one too. Fun times.

The only sensible advice I remember from that time was, everyone should dig a trench in the garden about 6 ft long, 2 ft wide and 3 ft deep with a pile of brush wood nearby, when you got the 4 minute warning you should lie in the hole and pull the brush wood over you; it wouldn't give you any protection but it would leave the earth nice and tidy.

[Woodchopper]

Any ideas of the purpose of it? Nuclear posturing seems a bit pointless outside of a cold-war scenario, and what the hell can you do with 260 warheads that you can't do with 200?

My uninformed guesses:

1. Post brexit desperate attempts to make ourselves seem more important
2. Trying to make the Americans like us again after apparent support for Cheeto Musolini
3. Some other countries are updating their big explodey things and therefore we should as well
4. 3-for-2 never to be repeated offer at Aldermaston
5. Worry that the US is going to go full-on ethno-religious lunatic post-coup in the next decade or so and it might get a bit "end of Mice and Men"
6. Vague attempt to make Russia piss off / go bankrupt again trying to keep up
7. Get some good headlines and shore up the vote from the "everything on my Amazon wishlist features the word Tactical" crowd

There are real concerns about international security.

Russia invaded Ukraine and has behaved antagonistically to the UK and its allies. There isn't much that NATO could do to stop it if it decided to take some territory from one or more of the Baltic states. Sweden is rearming due to fears of armed conflict in the Baltic region.

China has an antagonistic relationship with several of its neighbours, some of which like Singapore or Malaysia have historic ties to the UK.

Trump scared the sh.t out of people working on European security because for the first time since 1945 the willingness of the US to meet its alliance commitments was seriously in doubt. Trump is out but America First remains popular. President Ivanka may not be willing to sacrifice US troops to protect Europeans.

However, I don't see how increasing the number of cities that could be incinerated on the order of the UK Prime Minister is going to address any of those concerns.

As Sir Humphry remarked in one of the above clips, British nuclear weapons are an effective way to make the public feel defended, for as long as no one thinks about it too much.

[dyqik]

Meanwhile, the actual weapons available to resist Putin are chiefly financial laws, like enforcing tax and money laundering laws, and existing sanctions.

[Fishnut]

As someone who was too young to really appreciate the threat of nuclear war that the world faced in the mid/late 20th century it's always seemed like one of those things which have had their day and are no longer a real issue. Clearly I was being overly optimistic and rather naive.

There's a whole generation of people who don't know what actual existential dread of imminent catastrophe feels like, but yet feel existential dread about not-imminent future catastrophe all the time. They're going to sh.t themselves, poor bastards.

Maybe not quite as imminent as nuclear holocaust but I think the current generation of kids have a pretty good sense of existential dread from the global inaction on climate change.

[Bird on a Fire]

Meanwhile, the actual weapons available to resist Putin are chiefly financial laws, like enforcing tax and money laundering laws, and existing sanctions.

Yes. We could stop buying fossil fuels off him as well.

If people start nuking each other we've already lost.

[jimbob]

As someone who was too young to really appreciate the threat of nuclear war that the world faced in the mid/late 20th century it's always seemed like one of those things which have had their day and are no longer a real issue. Clearly I was being overly optimistic and rather naive.

I grew up knowing that nuclear annihilation was a a real possibility. There were plenty of political crises on the news which could blow up into the big one too. Fun times.

Yes - what we didn't realise is just how close we came on several occasions. Exercise Abel Archer '83 for example

[jimbob]

Make 260 radioactive holes in the Russian steppe rather than just 200, obv. Who can put a price on that?

Meanwhile here's Sir Humphrey still being relevant.

And these installments have aged remarkably well:

https://youtu.be/9KId-GgDcGk

https://youtu.be/1OitCT1KT4k

https://youtu.be/IKQlQlQ6_pk

https://youtu.be/o861Ka9TtT4

Yes, I often mention those

[Bird on a Fire]

As someone who was too young to really appreciate the threat of nuclear war that the world faced in the mid/late 20th century it's always seemed like one of those things which have had their day and are no longer a real issue. Clearly I was being overly optimistic and rather naive.

There's a whole generation of people who don't know what actual existential dread of imminent catastrophe feels like, but yet feel existential dread about not-imminent future catastrophe all the time. They're going to sh.t themselves, poor bastards.

Maybe not quite as imminent as nuclear holocaust but I think the current generation of kids have a pretty good sense of existential dread from the global inaction on climate change.

I mean, the climate catastrophe has already started - it's a present threat, not a future one.

Down here in hot places people are already cooking and burning to death in their homes on a yearly basis, and we all know it's going to keep getting worse until decades after the carbon emissions trajectory reverses. e.g. the Portuguese youngsters bringing a case against 33 governments in the ECHR. https://youth4climatejustice.org/ Obviously kids in hotter, poorer countries have it even worse and are less empowered to complain.