Blog powered by Typepad

« Trembling, I have decided to disobey MDA and MDS | Main | Your Monday Funnies: 25.1.16 »

Sunday, 24 January 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I see former NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg is thinking about an independent run for President. He of the way too many billions of dollars. He, Trump and Hillary...are loaded. A God awful aristocracy of rich. I think I had rather go back in time-before the French Revolution, before the American Rebellion/Revolution and see if there is actually any linkage to actual Georgian nobility. Do you good people there in Britain have any idle "real nobility" wandering about with time on their hands? We need a change here.

I stand ready, Sir, and should my noble antecedents be questioned I can easily print some off on this computer-thingie!

Sorry about this awful weather. What the US east coast calls a "nor'easter" is pretty much a winter hurricane. Hopefully the worst of it plays out before it reaches England's 'Best People'.

Maybe Poland and Czech Republic etal need to worry less about Vlad and more about Muhammad...."In other news, the Bishop of London recommends that vicars grow beards in order to demonstrate their holiness to Muslims, who are now the dominant religious group in London." Really??

Well David, we'll be glad to have you! I can fashion a decent looking crown and I have an old scabbard but for the life of me I can't find a sword. Will a carving knife do?

No, no, Whiters, please don't put yourself to any trouble, I'm sure my old theatre group have a few 'Shakespearean' props for me to wave about as I ride up to the White House!

"given that it is America that actually controls our 'independent' nuclear deterrent"

I wonder how they do that? I mean, if YOU know it is so, presumably the UK government and the RN know. And given that we've had the system for decades, we could easily have worked out how they did it, if they did, circumvent their control whilst letting them think it still worked.

Just wondering.

Yo. Typepad People! It's me, JK - Remember me?!!!


Eh, David?

I'm gonna land you on a Iowa TV station's website - I figure (if the link functions 'over there' as it does here) you perhaps, probably better than most will make the connection to what I'm pointing too. Whether it's "irony" (as y'all English know it) I leave to yourself.


Now secondarily-speaking - here's a link you've seen on D&N some years ago though I cannot (without hitting the archives) readily recall the earlier motivation/context. Has to do with y'alls King James feller, elliptically-speaking-wise.

One thing that majorly disappoints me is the assumption that Trident is the only system whereby a nuclear deterrent can be deployed. Maybe it's the best way, maybe there's a better way, but at the moment the only alternative to Trident being discussed is unilateral nuclear disarmament.

I thought that was just your stomach rumbling.

As I understand it, BOE, the Defense Dept. hold the keys to the coding required for the missiles.

Pat, I was reading today that our submarines are now hugely vulnerable to drone-submarines that can detect movement/sound at huge ranges.

Don't you worry, Andra, when my stomach rumbles you will know all about it, even 'down under there'!

As I understand it, BOE, the Defense Dept. hold the keys to the coding required for the missiles.

The actual launching of the missiles takes place from Northwood and, having formerly been an Royal Navy facility (it is now under joint command) the security is dealt with by the Royal Marines. A pal of mine was assigned there as the CO of the RM detail posted there and he had occasion to review the procedure and protocols that accompany any decision to launch missiles. As he tells the story, he successfully managed to get one part changed because there was an action in there which he thought highly dangerous and couldn't comply with: he had to enter a closed room in the company of a sailor with a rifle!

It does rather stick in the craw to have to go cap in hand to the americans for stuff for trident.

It makes makes me laugh (hollowly) to hear it described as our "independent deterrent".

Plus I would suspect that ICBMs are rather an old fashioned way to deliver nuclear weapons and that the warheads themselves do not match our own strategic imperatives; and that better results could be achieved with nuclear tipped cruise missiles.

Duffers - I don't know why an otherwise intelligent gentleman like your good self would bother reading Peter Hitchens. Guy's an idiot.

But thank you for the excellent pointers to the National Review articles which are very good.

@ Tim Newman - I would certainly be wary of entering a closed room with a sailor - with or without a rifle.

JK, thanks for your comment which I found in the spam box - bloody-bloody Typepad! - and that Jeffery Hodges is a very learned fellow.

Cuffers, whilst I second your remarks concerning armed sailors I must defend the excellent Peter Hitchens who has the accuracy and explosive power of a Trident missile!

"ICBMs are rather an old fashioned way to deliver nuclear weapons"

Perhaps they are still used because no one has thought of a better way? As to cruise missiles, the Russians have just deployed a SAM system in Syria expressly designed to shoot down cruise missiles.

Cruise missiles have the same problem as ballistic missiles with conventional warheads. How does the recipient know they are not nuclear? They don't, so will have to treat it as a nuclear attack.

As to our host's drone subs - dream on!

Alas, BOE, I can't remember where I read about 'drone subs' but the essence of it was that they carried new technology which could detect manned subs over long distances. Here's a primer:

BOE - The russians may well have a SAM system for cruise missiles, but I very much doubt that the SAM system has been developed that cannot when required be rendered inoperative by counter measures.

And blithely to assume that because they are still being used therefore ICBMs are the best possible solution to the problem seems to overlook the incredibly long development leadtimes, the extent of corruption in procurement and the general incompetence and especially inertia displayed in all government procurement that should assume at all times.

THe US gets away with murder in this respect simply by throwing so much money at the issue, but tin pot countries like the UK sell themselves badly short.

The trident deterrent is a "modern" solution to a 1950's problem.

WHat does the UK need a deterrent for nowadays? To deter whom? and what is the nature of the threat they pose to us? Who is likely to be the threat in 30 years time? What do we think the nature of the threat might be? In all honesty I don't think Trident is the answer to any of these questions. Especially when you factor in the large amount of resources (both cash and political) tied up.

The King James Bible was not really produced by the committee that was credited with it. Over 85% was lifted straight from the William Tyndale version, with the committee men largely restricting themselves to amending the bits that were politically incorrect by the standards of the day. So it's Tyndale who should get the credit.

On Poland, a thousand soldiers are a thousand more than we sent over last time we wanted to deter someone! But we remain poorly placed to refight the battle of Kursk.

H. The battle of Kursk would have wiped out the British tank divisions if we had been involded. Better leaving it to the natives.

'H', based on Mr. Nicolson's book I would have to disagree with you. I'm a bit busy today but I will post again on the subject later.

The comments to this entry are closed.