TheOstrich wrote:I am very worried about where this is all going. The choice of Vance as Vice-Presidential candidate brings a second hard-liner into power, one who has already taked a snipe at the UK - Islamic state with nuclear weapons. I do not think that we can trust or rely on either Trump or Vance. This is not going to be something we have to "weather for just four years if Vance is Trump's natural MAGA heir.
I think it's now absoluely imperative that we move closer to the EU in defence and security co-operation. I think the potential problems coming down the line transcend any Brexit anomosity and we should all reckognise this. The EU needs to take a long hard look at itself and move onto a war economy footing, and we need to do the same. I'm personally glad we've got Starmer in charge of this country now, we need someone calculating and level-headed in No.10.
If I were Zelensky, I think I'd be giving up now. Trump is almost certainly going to "broker" a peace with Putin over his head.
I am not sure how much longer we will have a nuclear deterrent to rely on. As I understand it, we cannot launch without American permission. There's no guarantee that if Europe is attacked, NATO will be able to put up a response with Trump calling the shots from the White House.
Suff, do the French have 100% control over their own nuclear arsenal?
I guess we need to hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. Rachael Reeves should start by issuing a NSIB War Bond to get money in, and we need to start revitalising our defence ASAP.
Ossie, the UK is the worlds third largest Nuclear power. Behind Russia but ahead of France. The UK doesn't Need to get into security co-operation with anyone, others Need the UK to co-operate with them. The UK arsenal is not in UK control until the second a threat goes live and there is likely a launch. Then command and control of the UK arsenal cuts right back to the UK and we are weapons free.
The French do have 100% control of their arsenal because they do not have a technology or manufacturing deal with anyone. However let me tell you the reality of that situation. France was stopped from testing before they could get to 3rd stage weapons. So French weapons significantly lack the power that UK, US and Russian weapons have. 3 stage weapons pack significantly more power into the same footprint. Witness that the French have more than twice the number of weapons that the UK do but have less deliverable megatonnage than the UK. In short their subs, missiles and gravity bombs all deliver far les impact than UK weapons. Their missiles are not as capable and their warheads are far less powerful. To Russia they are a concern and to any smaller country they are very dangerous, but they do not project the same message. If Russia attacks the UK we can totally decimate them, if they attack France without Nato, there is a good chance the damage won't be too bad.
When talking about US support, under Obama we were further away from collaboration with the US Than we will ever be with Trump. Vance will learn the shape of the world as he has to deal with Europe and their "attitude" To the "Anglo Saxons" and their dislike of having to rely on the US who they see as a rather "fairweather" friend. Obama ran off to Germany to talk to them about Nato rather than talking to the UK. I hope everyone understands the reality of that little statement?
Let us go back to the Ukrainian war. Russia was building up, Biden was prevaricating and the EU were closing their doors ready for Putin to sweep in and take over. Politicians were already gearing themselves up for "negotiating" with the new rulers of Ukraine. Boris and the UK assessed the situation and priority shipped thousands of tank and combat vehicle killing man portable weapons. The decapitation attack on Kyiv was stalled and then beaten back. Only through shame did Biden eventually send Javelin missiles and the whole situation turned.
Why?
Because the UK, the third most powerful military nation on the planet decided that Putin wasn't going to win this one.
We need to get in bed with whom? Those who wrote Ukraine off? Why? Because the US VP has a very strong Republican rhetoric, doesn't like Labour and wants a US First focus on the world?
I don't think so and I certainly don't believe that submitting our very powerful forces to the control of the EU (which is what they want), when the EU were ready to write Ukraine off, is the way to go.
BTW have you seen that they are calling Vance assassination insurance. If you don't want Trump you sure as Hell don't want Vance.
