The Student Room Group

BREAKING - MPs vote to renew Trident weapons system

MPs have backed the renewal of the UK's Trident nuclear weapons system, voting 472 to 117 in favour in Parliament.

The vote approves the manufacture of four replacement submarines at an estimated cost of £31bn.

Defence Secretary Michael Fallon told MPs nuclear threats were growing around the world and Trident "puts doubts in the minds of our adversaries".

Labour was split over the issue with many of its MPs defying leader Jeremy Corbyn and backing the government.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by HamzahPatel
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon told MPs nuclear threats were growing around the world and Trident "puts doubts in the minds of our adversaries".


Most countries do not have Nuclear weapons , the UK is an exception alongside 8 other nations which have Nuclear weapons

Just think of what all that money could of been spent on but nah lets spend it on a defense system which is never used and ill equipped to deal with modern day terrorism.
Common sense prevails.
Well, ****.
Even if we didn't renewal Trident, the money probably would have been spent on military related equipment or further long term projects. I don't think I can believe the rhetoric that the money would be put to other uses.
Ad much as I'd like to see a world without nuclear weapons we're certainly not at that point yet. Nukes have kept major conflicts at bay since the end of the Second World War & with a Putin's Russia, an unpredictable China, crazy North Korea and Pakistan have nuclear missiles I see no choice but to renew them.
Fascinating that we suddenly have a spare £200bn when it comes to nuclear weapons. Shame we can't garner the same response for the genuinely important issues facing modern society.
Reply 7
Original post by Polka_Specs
Most countries do not have Nuclear weapons , the UK is an exception alongside 8 other nations which have Nuclear weapons

Just think of what all that money could of been spent on but nah lets spend it on a defense system which is never used and ill equipped to deal with modern day terrorism.


The cost is around £3-4bn per year set against overall tax revenues of around £800bn.

To put it in context, the National Audit Office regards £4bn as a potential accounting error. Government can more than afford to pay for whatever you want too. They just choose not to.

Original post by HamzahPatel
MPs have backed the renewal of the UK's Trident nuclear weapons system, voting 472 to 117 in favour in Parliament.

The vote approves the manufacture of four replacement submarines at an estimated cost of £31bn.

Defence Secretary Michael Fallon told MPs nuclear threats were growing around the world and Trident "puts doubts in the minds of our adversaries".

Labour was split over the issue with many of its MPs defying leader Jeremy Corbyn and backing the government.


60% of Labour MP's defied Corbyn and voted with the government.

Majority since the 07 vote increased.

A great day for British defense, especially since the subs are home grown and our navy (including submarines) are nigh on the best in the world one on one (we lose out a bit in the air where we buy foreign stuff).
Reply 8
Original post by Plagioclase
Fascinating that we suddenly have a spare £200bn when it comes to nuclear weapons. Shame we can't garner the same response for the genuinely important issues facing modern society.


We also have a spare £5 trillion for the NHS if we want to start misleading people by asserting the cost over 30 years.
'Although Labour MPs were given a free vote, many used the occasion to attack Mr Corbyn, who is a longstanding opponent of nuclear weapons. The BBC understands that 60% of Labour's MPs voted in favour of Trident renewal.'

Sounds about right :lol:
Original post by Plagioclase
Fascinating that we suddenly have a spare £200bn when it comes to nuclear weapons. Shame we can't garner the same response for the genuinely important issues facing modern society.


Except the total cost is nothing like that number that's been randomly plucked out of thin air.

And it ignores the fact that a considerable majority of that money is going to provide tens of thousands of jobs for the next 40 years as well as being a colossal investment in science, engineering, ship building and all the related industries.
Original post by Rakas21
We also have a spare £5 trillion for the NHS if we want to start misleading people by asserting the cost over 30 years.


Except (1) we're talking about additional costs not base costs and (2) the NHS isn't a system designed to destroy civilization.
Reply 12
I'm just waiting for judgement day now...


Original post by Rakas21
The cost is around £3-4bn per year set against overall tax revenues of around £800bn.

To put it in context, the National Audit Office regards £4bn as a potential accounting error. Government can more than afford to pay for whatever you want too. They just choose not to.


It's a shame that we can afford a nuclear defense system but we can't invest in desperately needed housing and supporting the most vulnerable in our society.
Get rid of nukes and get rid of NATO the world will be a better place.
Original post by Polka_Specs
Just think of what all that money could of been spent on but nah lets spend it on a defense system which is never used and ill equipped to deal with modern day terrorism.


It's being used as we speak. Hence the word "deterrence".

And modern day terrorism is merely one type of threat to a nation. There are others. Hence why there are different weapon systems and different branches of the armed forces.
Original post by Polka_Specs
It's a shame that we can afford a nuclear defense system but we can't invest in desperately needed housing and supporting the most vulnerable in our society.


What good is supporting society if we can't defend it?
Original post by Drewski
Except the total cost is nothing like that number that's been randomly plucked out of thin air.


It's a figure that is a few percentage points higher than the government's £179bn estimate which is almost certainly an underestimate.
Original post by Drewski
What good is supporting society if we can't defend it?


Tell me , when we did we last nuclear weapons ?
Correct decision

Quick Reply

Latest