British Navy Armed with US Nuclear Warheads


The British edition of The Guardian revealed the details of a very unpleasant storieswhich caused sincere bewilderment and extreme displeasure of the members of the parliament there, and especially those who are trying to influence the country's defense policy. In the United States, the decision was made that London had made a firm commitment to equip its own submarine fleet with new US-made nuclear weapons. However, for most members of the political establishment of Misty Albion, this was a complete surprise.


This is a statement made by Pentagon officials who said that the basis for updating the British nuclear arsenal in the near future will be a sea-based W93 warhead, which is the warhead for the next generation of ballistic missiles for submarines. The same information was indirectly confirmed by the head of the US Strategic Command, Admiral Charles Richard, during a hearing in the Senate Defense Committee, mentioned the presence of "the need for a new warhead, which will be called W93 or Mk7." He also stressed that the implementation of this program “will support similar actions in the United Kingdom, whose nuclear deterrence plays a vital role in NATO’s common defense position.”

With all this, the British Ministry of Defense’s traditional communiqué addressed to the country's parliament, published late last year on this topic, said only "continued work in support of the government’s decision to replace the warhead." Apparently, between the military departments of the two countries there was a tacit agreement on keeping information on this issue secret at least until the moment when sirs from the parliament could simply be confronted with a fait accompli. However, the guys from the Pentagon with their inherent “tact” and “delicacy” decided everything in their own way, and the deal, the fulfillment of which promises London billions of dollars, became public ahead of time.

Edward Davy, the acting leader of the parliamentary faction of the liberal democrats, expressed particular indignation at this situation. In his view, the government’s decision “to give the green light to the development of new nuclear technologies weapons"Without a thorough study of the issue and" with zero consultation "is" completely unacceptable. " Most of the parliamentarians went to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Davy believes, in particular, that with him, "Britain follows where Trump leads her, increasingly turning into a toy in his hands." The practice, in the framework of which “the main defense decisions of Great Britain are discussed in the United States, and not in Great Britain,” he refers to as “a flagrant scandal”.

Well, it is not known how this incident will affect Johnson’s already rather spoiled reputation, but the agreement to purchase the W93 as a result is unlikely to be terminated, no matter how indignant in parliament. And the saddest moment here is not the huge expenditures of London (let the sirs there survive), but the fact that this is another step towards further building up nuclear arsenals and reducing the level of security in our troubled world.
Author:
Photos used:
Wikipedia
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rocket757 24 February 2020 16: 17 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Cousins ​​sing in unison .... as always.
    1. lucul 24 February 2020 16: 35 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Cousins ​​sing in unison .... as always.

      Yeah, only one of them is now the leader / slave))))
      1. Range 24 February 2020 17: 07 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        The question, in fact, is very controversial, as it seems at first glance. And who has the greatest influence on the United States with Israel or the Naglobrit? It seems to me that Israel has more lobbyists in the penguinostan, both from the Democrats and the Republicans.
        1. rocket757 24 February 2020 17: 52 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          The island cat, of course, is torn, but experienced! This cannot be taken away from them. Despite the fact that everything was crushed there, archives and developments, how and to whom to spoil, they are not small.
          Just from the side to see! Oh how everything is not easy there !!!
      2. cniza 24 February 2020 18: 38 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: lucul
        Cousins ​​sing in unison .... as always.

        Yeah, only one of them is now the leader / slave))))


        There may be a third party ... lol
    2. TermNachTer 24 February 2020 20: 01 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      So the sea-based missiles they always had mattresses - Polaris then Trident. I don’t know whose warheads there used to be. But I think that it’s rather difficult to adapt British warheads to mattress rockets.
  2. Petrol cutter 24 February 2020 16: 43 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    "Britain follows where Trump leads her, increasingly turning into a toy in his hands." The practice, in the framework of which “the main defense decisions of Great Britain are discussed in the United States, and not in Great Britain,” he refers to only as “a flagrant scandal”.
    Did he just find out about this?
    Still well done Ed Davy. Gave an answer to Chamberlain / Johnson.
    "And the saddest point here is not the huge expenses of London (let the sirs there be worried for them), but the fact that this is another step towards further building up nuclear arsenals and reducing the level of security in our troubled world."
    Unfortunately, this is not inevitable. But the more enemies bite among themselves, the better for us. In my unenlightened view.
  3. Mathafaka 24 February 2020 16: 55 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Does Sir Davy want to shove his warhead?
    1. Petrol cutter 24 February 2020 17: 00 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      And I don’t give a damn what Deyvushka wants there. The main thing for me is that the enemies of the stick stick to each other in the wheels. You look and stumble ...
    2. Range 24 February 2020 17: 23 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      And who will guarantee that the Poseidons do not already lie at the bottom off the coast of the penguinostan and the UK? After all, the topic of Poseidons is under such a veil of secrets that Mama Do not Cry. And at the right time it will be announced do not rock the boat, with its disarming global strike. My opinion. If you have brains, then you can challenge my comment, and if not, then minus. Although the pros and cons on this resource is the biggest stupidity that the human mind could come up with. Unless, of course, the goal is to separate peoples and people.
      1. Hypatius 24 February 2020 18: 41 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        There is nothing to challenge, especially a positively soothing opinion :). For the cons, it’s sad, but it can be beneficial for trolls. But, my doubts are expressed in the fact that this task is similar to space (+ secrecy). But Rogozin is not kicked here only by the lazy, for the results of the work of Roscosmos. And there is no reason to believe that in some secret industry everything is tip-top, and in space a mess only to avert the eyes of spyware laughing
        1. Range 24 February 2020 20: 35 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          Yes, and trolls cons zapadlo. Trolls were invented to swing the "pendulum of discord" and it doesn’t matter on which side it is swinging, on the plus or minus side. Ignore is the most effective remedy. The space industry is divided into two parts: one consumer goods and the other for the aerospace industry - these are completely different things and they rarely intersect. Yes, and “all polymers were baked” - this is another extreme, which causes no less harm than the lies of the penguinostan and western vassals. It is necessary to determine whether a person is a real citizen of Russia and accepts her as she is (with all the pros and cons) or her enemy. There is no third.
          1. Salty 24 February 2020 20: 53 New
            • 5
            • 3
            +2
            Quote: Spectrum
            It is necessary to determine whether a person is a real citizen of Russia and accepts her as she is (with all the pros and cons) or her enemy

            By this criterion there are enemies like gophers. Although I like the criterion, I support it.
          2. Hypatius 25 February 2020 01: 21 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Just in space hand in hand. But the further passage about the real citizen I did not clear. It looks like a manipulation: turning into a miracle (-weapon), even though we lied more than once. laughing Someone said: I love my homeland, but I hate the state. good It is not necessary to dump a bunch of worthless nonsense-hands of stewards and a homeland with a great past, so as not to be among 90% of the enemies in their country.
  4. Amateur 24 February 2020 17: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    “The Cabinet Secretary brought me a detailed report on the PM’s visit to Washington ...
    Nevertheless, we had to solve one serious problem. By the word “to us,” I meant all of us, that is, the Cabinet, the Treasury, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defense, and everything else, only with a lower rank. PM still wants to abolish the Tridents and cruise missiles, but retain the Polaris
    .
    .
    .
    Yes, the prime minister’s rights are, of course, unconditional and very extensive. He is provided with his own car with a personal driver, a good house in the center of London, a country residence, almost endless advertising in all media and a lifetime pension. What else might PM want?
    “I think he wants to rule Britain,” Bernard answered.
    But this in no case should be allowed! Not that level of competency. ”
    (Yes, prime minister)
  5. U-58 24 February 2020 17: 27 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    I somehow didn’t understand.
    But what about the international laws on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons?
  6. Oleg83 24 February 2020 17: 30 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    But what about the "nuclear non-proliferation treaty" and others?
    After all, in fact, the United States sells to another country (Great Britain) both ballistic missiles for submarines and nuclear warheads
    1. Petrol cutter 24 February 2020 17: 40 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      For some reason I thought all my life that Great Britain is a member of the nuclear club. Anyway...
    2. Blackmokona 24 February 2020 17: 41 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Britain is a member of the club of nuclear powers, no restrictions apply to this club under the agreement
  7. Hypatius 24 February 2020 18: 23 New
    • 0
    • 3
    -3
    Can Russia, instead of disposing of warheads, sell a hundred of these to India? As a member of a member of the NPT.
    1. Blackmokona 25 February 2020 10: 05 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      India is not a member of the club of nuclear powers. And the NPT did not sign the treaty.
      1. Hypatius 25 February 2020 11: 05 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Yeah, something I went wrong. It is strange that she and the rest of the chosen ones are not driven into this club. Trade with the United States and Europe is decent, there is something to put pressure on.
        1. Blackmokona 25 February 2020 11: 14 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          They tried to strangle her with sanctions for developing nuclear weapons, but in the end they scored and decided to unite her against a much more dangerous China
  8. cniza 24 February 2020 18: 36 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    In the United States, a decision was made that London had made a firm commitment to equip its own submarine fleet with new US-made nuclear munitions.


    Barrels of money ...
  9. Iwan_de 24 February 2020 18: 48 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    They do not have their own missiles. All nuclear missiles from Tan. There was a theme that they should not be launched without orders from Washington.
  10. Pacifist with AK 24 February 2020 19: 13 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    The UK is hard at work .... Whoever kisses the girl dances her?)))))))
  11. Ryaruav 24 February 2020 19: 43 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    All the same, the United States does not have a bottomless military budget, they freeze many R&D and try to at least somehow use the finances of vassals
    1. cniza 24 February 2020 19: 47 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Quote: Ryaruav
      All the same, the United States does not have a bottomless military budget, they freeze many R&D and try to at least somehow use the finances of vassals


      Not just that, but in full ...
  12. Old26 24 February 2020 20: 05 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Spectrum
    And who will guarantee that the Poseidons do not already lie at the bottom off the coast of the penguinostan and the UK?

    Common sense and statements by the same Minister of Defense of Russia at the end of 2018. A sufficiently informed source, what do you think?

    Quote: Spectrum
    After all, the topic of Poseidons is under such a veil of secrets that Mama Do not Cry. And at the right time it will be announced do not rock the boat, with its disarming global strike.

    Dreaming that suddenly, without testing, we will have another "superwunderwaffe" of course you can, but the lesson is futile. As they say: "in the evening money - in the morning chairs." First you need to go through sea trials of the product, then joint and state tests, you need to have carriers in the system and only then you can ask if they are somewhere or is this another fake.
  13. Old26 25 February 2020 14: 04 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: TermNachTER
    So the sea-based missiles they always had mattresses - Polaris then Trident. I don’t know whose warheads there used to be. But I think that it’s rather difficult to adapt British warheads to mattress rockets.

    Starting with the Polaris A-3TK, there were British warheads instead of American ones.