The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

A myth of independence

Posted on November 02, 2015 by

The video clip below is from Russia Today, which is in no way an impartial news outlet. However, it’s dangerous and unwise to reflexively dismiss any message purely because of the medium. Heck, even the Daily Mail tells the truth sometimes.

That’s because the messenger in this case is Major General Patrick Cordingley DSO, a highly distinguished British Army veteran commander who led the invasion of Iraq in the first Gulf War in 1991, and who before the second one in 2003 (by which time he’d retired) had a very perceptive view of both the battle and the likely aftermath.

When we join the clip he’s discussing the USA.

His views are expert and worth listening to. (The full interview is here.) Readers can, as ever, decide for themselves whether to believe him or David Cameron.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 02 11 15 18:44

    A myth of independence | Speymouth

209 to “A myth of independence”

  1. Cordingley’s statement is very true and accurate. There is also a scenario where the USA could assume control of these warheads and order the UK to fire them on their behalf. In effect, this reduces the UK to a proxy weapons’ base for the USA, but where vast sums have been paid for that privilege.

  2. Bugger (the Panda) says:

    We don’t own the missile, merely lease them, and cannot fire them on our own.

    So basically we are an outsourced US nuclear strike force.

    Yet still we pay £167+ Billions and rising as we breathe for that bit og=f political willy waving.

    Meanwhile our people starve to pump up the sociopathic egos of these political turds

  3. Calum Craig says:

    I actually quite like RT. Just filter out the anti US stuff and it’s a much better source than the BBC.

  4. Just to clarify…..where a UK PM was opposed to firing these systems US EUCOM will simply assume control as per NATO command & control structures. This is why the French are not full members of NATO, they want complete control of their military systems, including their nuclear materiel.

  5. West_Lothian_Questioner says:

    Welcome, one and all, to Airstrip One … Orwell was right again.

  6. yesindyref2 says:

    who led the invasion of Iraq in the first Gulf War in 1991

    I’ve got to pick you up on that one Rev, it was a liberation of Kuwait, and as soon as the objective was achieved and the Republican guard routed, the forces withdrew to Kuwait.

  7. Anonymous Coward says:

    There is a small but significant chance that a certain Mr. D. Trump may end up as POTUS. (I know, I know – but people said that about Reagan too.)

    As little as I trust David Cameron’s judgement, I trust Trump’s even less and the notion that he and his cohort will have ultimate control of the UK’s “independent” nuclear forces scares the shit out of me.

    The paranoid android in me can imagine a scenario where he uses Trident to flatten a UK city as a false-flag operation to justify war with Russia.

  8. Lenny Hartley says:

    I’m watching RT just now in New York State, no sign of that interview over here, will keep watching and advise.

  9. Davy says:

    The biggest propaganda myth by the ban the bomb warriors is we can not control the decision to launch ourselves. Absolute tosh. There are protocals to be followed by signatories but in the end, the final decision rests with the UK government and NOT the USA as the CND buffons would have everyone believe. Waken up people.

  10. jimnarlene says:

    So, we are America’s stationary attack vessel, with some subs that can move around, but not fire; unless uncle Sam wants us to.
    Sounds a bit like Slab.

  11. Caroline Corfield says:

    I’ve heard it all. General Patrick Cordingley DSO is apparently a ban the bomb warrior now. And encroaching on a nation’s borders is not invading.

  12. Capella says:

    I always understood it to be a “dual key” system where both the UK and USA had to activate codes to fire the missiles. Which means, of course, that the USA makes the decision.

    Get rid of them from Scotland altogether. That is the only solution. If Labour voters want to get rid of Trident they know who to vote for.

  13. heedtracker says:

    So Faslane’s fundamentally a US military asset but not actually paid for by the US. Pretty neat and no wonder their hired SLabour goon raged vote NO or else-

    “BARON George Robertson of Port Ellen, once the UK’s Defence Secretary and NATO’s Secretary General, now better known as Lord Robertson, has warned that if the people of Scotland vote for independence it could mean the end of Western civilisation as we know it.

    For him a Yes vote would be a “cataclysmic” event destabilising the world and undermining the UK’s global status.”

  14. Free Scotland says:

    Kez sez: “Saying you are for something without doing something about it doesn’t help anybody.”

    Hang on, didn’t Kez say she was FOR trident renewal? C’mon then Kez, get out there into the highways and byways and tell everybody you meet what a brilliant thing trident is and why it’s a good idea to locate it next to Scotland’s most densely populated city. The people of Scotland will hang on your every word.

  15. Nana says:

    From Select Committee on Defence Written Evidence June 2006

  16. Davy says:

    @Caroline Corfield

    He is talking of the protocals to be observed. These are NOT cast in stone. If anyone thinks we do not have control over our defence is a delluded fool. Can you also see he is reporting on RT. Think about it or are you Nats that dumb !

  17. yesindyref2 says:

    There’s no codes. The PM’s decision is realyed to Northwood, relayed to the patrol boat, authenticated, and two keys are taken out of separate safes. Thers’s NO firing codes. There are plenty of fail-safes, however.

    As Davy says, it’s a malicious myth that the US has to be asked before the UK can fire its nukes (though likely there would have been some consultation if there was time to do so). The myth was probably put about by anti-CND people to discredit the CND, and is still successful it seems, to this day.

  18. yesindyref2 says:

    From that Greenpeace / CND paper: “The fact that, in theory, the British Prime Minister could give the order to fire Trident missiles without getting prior approval from the White House …

    Even their own paper actually acknowledges in the first sentence, that the deterrent is independent, and the UK is in control of firing.

    There are arguments against the deterrent, but this myth that the US controls it weakens the arguments as, to be blunt, it makes people think as Davy says “are you Nats that dumb” (or substitute CND for Nats).

  19. Davy says:


    I also think you fully understand the nonsense regarding the misleading GPS signal and coordinates that is talked of in the link from Nana. I would never discuss such things and neither would you. I’m corrrect – Yes ?!!?

  20. Not convinced says:

    So let’s consider the two scenarios …

    (1) The UK Prime Minister decides, for whatever reason, to launch. The message goes via the MoD to the submarine. The officers on the submarine concur that it’s a valid launch order, bring the submarine to the appropriate depth, load the target coordinates into the desired number of missiles and pull the trigger and the missiles fire. At what point and how does the USA get to invoke any kind of veto?

    (2) The USA decides to launch it’s nuclear weapons, but the UK for whatever reason doesn’t want to get involved. So under what circumstances at that point does the crew of the UK submarine decide that an order allegedly from the US President which they have no way of authenticating should cause them to launch even though they are (one would assume) receiving authenticated messages from the UK saying not to launch?

    Basically you have to believe (as Tony Benn apparently did/does) in some kind of fantasy about remote control submarines to make either of those scenarios work, and the problem there is that any such system would introduce a massive amount of insecurity into the system. Would you want to be the US President knowing that the right signal might accidentally start WW3 with no possibility of any human override? How would feel about the idea that in the event WW3 was breaking out, the right signal sent by the opposite side might render your nuclear weapons non functional?

  21. CmonIndy says:

    I don’t doubt for a second that US has launch control of these weapons. It’s their design and mostly their software. They can prevent a UK launch and they can enable a US launch which UK cant stop.

    Or do you believe that our big friend that locked us out of nuclear technology would trust our own judgment on when to launch and who to obliterate?

  22. mealer says:

    That weirdo Cameron would be better kept well out the road.

  23. Bob Mack says:


    Do you actually believe this country would fire a missile without consultation with America in the first instance.
    In your dreams guys

  24. Naina Tal says:

    Tea time for trolls?

  25. Caroline Corfield says:

    Aw, isn’t it sweet when they still believe in protocols?

  26. yesindyref2 says:

    @Caroline Corfield: “And encroaching on a nation’s borders is not invading

    As far as the Gulf War in 1991 is concerned, no, actually it isn’t. Resolution 678 was both quite clear and vague enough. It was clear in that if the ultimatum date of January for withdrawal wasn’t met, “all neccessary means … to restore international peace and security …”

    “… in the area” and vague enough to allow action inside Iraq. If military action in any area is called for, with Iraq having invaded Kuwait, it would have been totally ineffectual for the Repulican Giard to be able to withdraw to the line of their border, and laugh laugh laugh at the US and other forces.

  27. yesindyref2 says:

    I’m lucky in that I have no secret knowledge, but I have done a lot of sensible reading, and have always been interested in defence stuff. As far as I know the guidance of the Trident is intertial, so no need for GPS, except to refine initial targetting. It would have to be as the GPS satellites could be taken out, fairly easily.

  28. ArtyHetty says:

    Well, someone is lying then. It makes the ukok gov look big if they say they can control this abomination which some of mankind has so willingly embraced. Perhaps we should all be a tad concerned about just who it is that is bestowed with this kind of apocalyptic power.

    Ultimately these wmds need to be decomissioned and failing that removed from Scotland, let America house them. The majority of the people of Scotland are totally against these disgusting weapons.

    The madness of some men and some women is staggering don’t you think.

    Ok I am off to watch Stargate once I have made the tea, it makes much more sense than real bloody life. Not at all religious but I do say a wee prayer hoping that some fckwit is taken ill when they might have been tempted to destroy the blooming planet!

  29. heedtracker says:

    Davy says:
    2 November, 2015 at 6:31 pm
    @Caroline Corfield

    He is talking of the protocals to be observed. These are NOT cast in stone. If anyone thinks we do not have control over our defence is a delluded fool. Can you also see he is reporting on RT. Think about it or are you Nats that dumb !

    I am. So why he is telling Russian tv all this, as if Russian don’t already know who’s the boss?

    Hey is that you keverage? You were terrible on tv last week by the way, bit bonkers, Halloween unionist bonkers.

  30. Harry McAye says:

    O/T Earlier on Reporting Scotland, reporter Tim Reid signed off his report on the Scotland Bill witht he words “Gordon Brown, the man behind The Vow…” Is that a scoop?

  31. Lesley-Anne says:

    I read a while back, can’t remember where exactly for now, that it is not only the LACK of INDEPENDENCE over control of these white elephants that is the problem.

    The U.K. currently stuffs 16 of these white elephants into a sub and sends it out into the North Atlantic somewhere ready to fire these lovely 16 white elephants at Russia on the say so of Obama (currently)and possibly the nerd in a comb over in the future!

    Meanwhile over in Russia they have in the region of 4,000 nukes. Not only that but their nukes are not all crushed up into ONE sub, theirs are:

    submarine launched
    aircraft launched
    silo launched
    mobile launched

    More over in Russia they have something else that we do not … an anti missile tracking system and associated anti missile missiles.

    As far as I’m concerned anyone who condones the U.K.’s collection of white elephants is talking through a hole you know where. What are the chances of any of the 16 sub launched white elephants actually being able able to release their war heads … on a scale of 1 to 10 I’d say ZERO!

    Meanwhile along the same lines what are the chances of any of Russia’s 4,000 missiles being able to release their war heads … on the same scale of 1 to 10 I’d give it a 20!!!

    We have no surface fleet protection around S******d.

    We have no A.S.W. aircraft

    We have no long range maritime patrol aircraft.

    We have no anti missile missile system.

    Without being disrespectful to our brave fishermen, who do an amazing job in the harshest of conditions, they are NOT any sort of defence against an attacking navy or air force.

  32. Paula Rose says:

    Um – I can understand wanting to be able to pinpoint where a cruise missile with a conventional warhead detonates.

    Surely a nuclear weapon is designed to wipe out civilians and where they live over a wide area – so precision isn’t really that important, anywhere in the city will do.

  33. yesindyref2 says:

    I’ve been trying this for over 3 years, in the Guardian, then the Herald, now here. Think Vulcans.

    The V bomber was a fairly low-tech bomber, pilot looks at a map, gets the circular slide rule out and plots a course, he gets the stick, pours on the power and off she goes over Moscow. He then pulls a lever and this great inanimate lump of metal with a detonator drops down with gravity, and explodes over Moscow. There are no keys (well, the bomb i.e. detonator has to be armed). The bomb explodes in mushrooms.

    Now, according to CND the UK voluntarily gives up this totally controllable lump of metal for – a missile which the US has total control over. Ummmmmmm, reality disconnect.

  34. yesindyref2 says:

    @Bob Mack
    Yes, as I said, in normal circumstances the UK PM would consult with the US pressie.

  35. heedtracker says:

    heedtracker says:
    2 November, 2015 at 7:03 pm
    Davy says:
    2 November, 2015 at 6:31 pm
    @Caroline Corfield

    He is talking of the protocals to be observed. These are NOT cast in stone. If anyone thinks we do not have control over our defence is a delluded fool. Can you also see he is reporting on RT. Think about it or are you Nats that dumb !

    Ok so you’re clearly a troll but the only gain here for the UK military here is to weaken UK Trident 2 plans.

    Maybe even the UK army want the money spent on Trident 2.

  36. Lesley-Anne says:

    To be honest Caroline I think it was the scene of the highway from Kuwait back to Bagdad with the thousands of dead and destroyed vehicles that pushed George Bush Snr to call a halt to the Iraq war I. Up until these pictures were beamed around the world I it was well believed that the forces against Saddam Hussain were going “all the way” to Bagdad. The scenes on Highway one, or whatever it is called, put a stop to that idea.

    In my own personal view, I believe the cessation of progress towards Bagdad by his father played a a part in his, and Blair’s, decision to start Iraq war II, the scare story about W.M.D.s was the ideal cover for them at the time.

  37. yesindyref2 says:

    Now that’s a good posting, though we do have misile tracking systems. ICBMs are supersonic, they go up, then split into multiply independent re-entry missiles (basically). The Russians debatably do have a hypersonic intercept missile, whereas apparently we and the Yanks don’t. Ooops.

  38. Steve says:

    Can I take it Davy is a troll? Each time I read this sort of nonsense I ask the simple question. Can we launch a nuclear strike against the US using Trident? If not, it’s not an independent deterrent. Still waiting for an answer that amounts to more than abusive comments. And if you are going to launch insults, might be best if you can get your spelling right. Hope you’re not in charge of inputting data when the missiles are fired.

  39. Jock Scot says:

    I realise that the SLAB vote on Sunday is immaterial regarding Westminster but if a referendum was held before the WM go-ahead for renewal, then wouldn’t we have a stronger case on the world forum if the result was a huge..FUCK OFF wi’ yir abominable toys

  40. Lesley-Anne says:

    yesindyref2 says:
    2 November, 2015 at 7:20 pm

    Now that’s a good posting, though we do have misile tracking systems. ICBMs are supersonic, they go up, then split into multiply independent re-entry missiles (basically). The Russians debatably do have a hypersonic intercept missile, whereas apparently we and the Yanks don’t. Ooops.

    Still if all else fails yes we STILL have Trident! 😀

  41. Bob Mack says:

    @ yesindyref2,

    In normal circumstances,.Like that. Here is some news for you.

    The subs are made in Uk, but every part of the rocket has American input. Guidance systems ,trigger codes, targetting tapes made up by USA. The warhead is assembled at Aldermaston which is part run by an American outfit Honeywell.
    When the rocket is launched the Commander has no idea of where the target is.It is already programmed into the missile.
    The software and hardware on the boat and missile is all American.
    Every firing of a test weapon has to be done under American supervision.

    Independent nuclear deterrant? Don’t make me laugh.

  42. Thepnr says:

    I’m not going to debate about who has control of the UK’s Trident missiles.

    What I will speculate instead is that I was the US President or Secretary of Defense I don’t think I would be supplying any country with these weapons (even special relationship best friends) if there was any possibility of them being used against the US or their interests.

    Nope, think I’d reserve the means of having them destroyed in mid flight if necessary, no matter who pushed the button. In fact I’d even fit a tracking system just to keep an eye on them.

    The UK would never do that to one of our friends, you know like spy on them. LOL

  43. yesindyref2 says:

    @Lesley-Anne: “Still if all else fails yes we STILL have Trident!”

    Well, if science and technology and anti-missile-missile-missile electronic jamming and force fields (supposedly actually possible now) evolve, then in 50 years wars might well be fought with swords, axes and – tridents 🙂

  44. Paula Rose says:

    But surely the point is that this is not a deterrent because of the vastly superior US arsenal and if it were ever to be used then it would be useless as regards us because we would have had our lives destroyed already.

  45. Davy says:

    Never seen such a display of ignorance over a topic in my entire life. Incredibile the level of hatred displayed. You all think an accident will happen and Scotland will light up. How stupid can you be !

    It always amazes me that when dealing with Nats, if you don’t agree, then you are a troll. Is the truth not important to you guys or has the bile and hatred got such a grip that the ability for independent thought been suppressed in a mire of woad, Braveheart movie screening and propaganda from your dictators. ! It’s a shame for Scotland to have such a level of ignorance.

    Come on guys. Start thinking for yourself for once.

  46. Papadox says:


    Nae winners folks For those who think GOOD OLD BLIGHTY might survive an atomic attack from Russia, China, India, Pakistan, N Korea or any other bampot (inc USA) is pretty thick and not very knowledgable. GET RID OF THE F***ING THINGS.

    Without the good old Uncle Sam to back us up we have Nae punch greater than a very small “POLICE ACTION” so grow up and act your age.

  47. heedtracker says:

    Come on guys. Start thinking for yourself for once.

    No. You tell us what to think Keverage!

    So once again, with all that trolling unionist frothing goodness what you have got by the ton

    Why he is telling Russian tv all this, as if Russian don’t already know who’s the boss?

  48. Thepnr says:


    “Incredibile the level of hatred displayed.”

    Who from? One person likened you to a troll, however you liken those that oppose your view of the world to buffons, dumb and ignorant.

    “…final decision rests with the UK government and NOT the USA as the CND buffons would have everyone believe”

    “Think about it or are you Nats that dumb !”

    “Never seen such a display of ignorance over a topic in my entire life.”

    PS I am not a Nat.

  49. louis.b.argyll says:

    ..Get these BOMBS off MY LAND..

  50. dakk says:

    Yesindyref2 7.02

    ‘Ummm reality disconnect’

    What,like wasting £4 billion on the scrapped Nimrod AEW which ironically helped to protect Trident,and £6 billion on 2 aircraft carriers we can’t afford to put planes on.

    Where defence procurement is concerned,strategy doesn’t seem to be a strong suit for UK,so I think you give them too much credit.

  51. HandandShrimp says:



    You talk about hatred and you are firing insults left right and centre. Stupid this, dumb that, woad, and Braveheart.

    You are a stereotypical troll with a complete lack of guile and, what is worse, style and wit. Being a troll is an art form…sort yourself out.

    As for an independent UK defence policy, the UK hasn’t had one of those since the US told us to get back in our box over Suez.

  52. yesindyref2 says:

    @Bob Mack
    The last test fire of a UK nuclear warhead was in 1991, these days it’s done by computer simulation.

    As for the missile, the Trident rocket, the first was fired from a Vanguard in 1994 totally under control of the Captain. The last was in 2012 from HMS Valiant off Florida, to take advantage of America’s telemetry and tracking systems. The missile was unarmed!

  53. Bob Mack says:


    The ignorance would appear to be your own.

  54. Bob Mack says:


    The captain has no idea where his missile is going.Apart from his obvious naval skills. ( Hms Astute) aside, he is merely a button pusher.

  55. Angra Mainyu says:

    Papadox, the MAD thing was a name cooked up by American marketing guys for the purposes of selling policy to the US taxpayer. It was originally called MAR (mutually assured retaliation) which wasn’t scary enough for them.

    It’s of no real import, just thought it interesting. Defence is more or less always about getting people to reach for their wallets, it seems.

  56. yesindyref2 says:

    @Paula Rose
    Well, I guess as far as being a deterrent is concerned, if say 80 warheads from one sub reach their targets, a country is basically destroyed, so there’s little difference between 80 and 800. Even just 1 getting through destroys Moscow, London, Paris or New York. Or Beijing.

    Not a lot of people know that the UK had nuke tech before the US. And we had our own rockets / missiles.

  57. Jamie says:

    Sounds true to me. Why would the Americans allow the UK to have a nuclear weapons arsenal if it was not to benefit them? During the more Socialist years of the UK, we had to prove we were not slipping over to the commie side and as such buying nuclear weapons for NATO reassured the USA who at that time were spying on the UK and the prime minister to make sure he was not secretly a Soviet. Mad but indeed true, but no secret this all has been known for a long time and those people saying the UK has an independent detterent need to wake up. When was the last time the UK went to fight a battle alone? A very long time, Falklands? USA supplied UK with weapons secretly although now well known. WW2? WW1? NO. Reality is the UK has been the 51st state of the US since the UK got pumped by the US during the US REVOLUTION, simples.

  58. Free Scotland says:

    Well, you learn something new every day. The word protocol is actually spelt protocal. And deluded is now spelt delluded. And incredible is spelt incredibile. And the guy who wrote it asks us nats if we are dumb, even although he himself doesn’t know the difference between an exclamation mark and a question mark.

    Sawd offe, pathettik onionist trawl.

  59. Clootie says:

    …let me think. Should I go with a Major General with an established record who I heard speak the words during an interview OR a post by Davy?

    I think I’ll go with Major General Cordingley.

  60. Paula Rose says:

    So – what are the threats that we need an organised defence capability to counter? Secondly can anyone show a case for Trident as it stands?

    And please let’s discuss this in a reasonable fashion – we have many opinions and expertise here and I for one would like to hear all points of view.

  61. yesindyref2 says:

    Totally agree, Nimrod MRA4 had mostly got rid of its wing problem, and it had good sub attack capability. In the end I think it saved the grand sum of £1 billion out of £6 billion (?), they scrapped the lot, complete buffoons.

    The QE will start with heiicopters, will get the F35B supposedly near enough on time. It takes 2 years I think for full testing and commissioning, but they’ll be doing F35B triass fairly early on before getting a full complement (depending on SDSR15). I’m not a fan of the F35 I think performance was sacrificed to make it a 5th Gen jet. But I expect it’ll do the job.

  62. Iain says:

    Well said I know who I believe.

  63. donnywho says:

    David just out of curiosity, who was that ignorant man on RT. Was he a Nat, a member of some underground conspiracy ring, a screaming trot?

    What was he and how dare he say things you don’t agree with.

    But may i quietly remind you that he might… just might have a wee bit more knowledge of the workings of our military than all of us put together

  64. Onwards says:

    I’m pretty certain the US will have some sort of back door override in the Trident system.

    However I don’t expect that really matters, because I can’t think of a scenario where it would be used independently outside a Third World War where deterrence has failed.
    We are all in NATO anyway with joint defence.

    Essentially the UK government is paying billions extra to the USA, and certain favours are expected in return, such as supporting the permanent seat on the security council and intelligence cooperation.
    And speaking out against Scottish independence when requested.

  65. Barbara McKenzie says:

    ‘Russia Today, which is in no way an impartial news outlet’, as opposed to what?

    I have only recently been following RT, drawn in by offerings such as the above, but have been very impressed by their interviews and the quality of the journalists, many of whom are British.

    Snide remarks about ‘Pravda’ and RT no long have the same resonance given the way the BBC has exposed itself over issues like the Scottish referendum and Palestine/Israel.

    I have to say I am disappointed that Scottish commentators have shown such little interest in the fact that the head of BBC, Danny Cohen, signed the recent letter by ‘artists’ in support of Israel’s ethnic cleaning of Palestine. (Nor for that matter JK Rowling’s signature to the same)

  66. galamcennalath says:

    First hurdle, get the SNP an overall majority in May.

    Secondly, wait for WM to continue to screw us over a bit longer until it gets to say 55% Yes.

    Thirdly, as a decent trigger inevitable presents itself have a quick IndyRef2 and win.

    THEN we get the rUKists to shift their US WMD shit somewhere else!

  67. yesindyref2 says:

    Anyway, while politicians pontificate, I think Sturgeon got to the heart of it before most, which is cost, particularly now its cost seems to have gone up to £167 billion up to its end of service life in 2060.

    But what not one of them seem to have had the cop-on to ask is this. By the time the first Successor slips out to sea for its first CASD patrol in about 2030, 15 years from now, is it possible that it will be totally obsolete, useless in fact?

    Answers on a postcard from Russia, and the developers of BrahMos-V, or those of the Yu-71 Block III. China are a bit more inscrutable about what they’re up to.

  68. Paula Rose says:

    I and many others have advertised this post on the new media – there will be new readers, show them what a civilised discussion is.

  69. Macart says:

    The largest static aircraft carrier in the American fleet.

    USS UK.

    Who knew?

  70. One_Scot says:

    So we have to pay America £167 Billion pounds so they can have a base in Europe to store their nuclear weapons.

    I would have thought we should be receiving wayleave payments rather than giving them money.

  71. Schrodingers cat says:

    The war in the gulf mark 1, sponsored by mars and M&Ms, contained a number of different phases, desert shield, desert storm etc, but the allies definitely invaded Iraq, they pulled back after the Iraqi army had been neutralized, for a number of reasons, mainly the interpretation of the un mandate, some in the coalition would have liked to go further but it would have fractured the coalition.

    Re nuke missiles, the French subs and the 4th DAM Pluto missiles also incorporate us technology. See d’estaignes memoires for confirmation of this

    Cameron May be able to launch them, but there are many systems for stopping missiles, including electronic hacking, SAM etc. trident could just fall out of the air, or be redirected onto London. And we would know what or who did it, this isn’t the sort of info freely available but you can be certain that vast resources are used trying to do this by all sides

    There is also an underground facility on the west coast where all of the redundant nuke systems are stored since the 50’s. Eg Polaris is redundant now but it isn’t a light touch paper and stand well back piece of kit. When we vote yes in indyref2, all of these will need to be removed, Scotland wouldn’t be allowed to keep such a large collection of nukes. It would be in contravention of too many non proliferation treaties

  72. Free Scotland says:

    One_Scot says:

    “So we have to pay America £167 Billion pounds so they can have a base in Europe to store their nuclear weapons.”

    That’s it, we pay America for the privilege of being allowed to offer them the privilege of using us as their jackass for free.

  73. yesindyref2 says:

    Anyway (one of my favourite words), a quick bit or research pulls up what one would expect, but it does confirm the views of the vile cybernats who allege that there are those in the defence establishment would want to spend the money on Trident, more wisely elsewhere, a view I give some favour to.

    Field Marshal Lord Bramall, General Lord Ramsbotham, General Sir Hugh Beach, and Major General Patrick Cordingley—four former senior military commanders—have written in The Times that “replacing Trident will be one of the most expensive weapons programmes this country has seen. Going ahead will clearly have long-term consequences for the military and the defence equipment budget that need to be carefully examined”.

    They pointed out that “this decision will have a direct impact on our overstretched Armed Forces”, and that “it may well be that money spent on new nuclear weapons will be money that is not available to support our frontline troops, or for crucial counterterrorism work; money not available for buying helicopters, armoured vehicles, frigates or even paying for more manpower””

    Since the RN will have to include Trident in its budget, though there are those who deny the defence budget is split by service, I daresay there are a few sympathisers within the RN, I wonder what Zabelias thinks?

  74. caz-m says:

    Jackie Bailey continues with the exaggerated figures. This time she says that 13,000 jobs will be lost if Trident is scrapped.

    Jackie, can you explain where 13,000 people are working on Trident maintenance?

    There are only four Vanguard class nuclear missile subs. One will be at Devonport getting a refit, one or most probably two will be at sea and the fourth will be sitting at Faslane.

    So tell me, how do you fit 13,000 maintenance personnel into one sub?

    Please vote this waste of space out in May.

  75. Petra says:

    Who cares about who has what ‘say’ and how it’s done?

    Wait for Obama, Trump or Clinton to give the go ahead, dual control or running around waving wee bits of papers over your head on a UK Nuclear submarine?

    By the time someone acts on our behalf, we make the decision or joint decision, the other side will have pressed the button too. Say hello, wave goodbye!

    Nuclear weapons didn’t prevent 9/11 or frighten the Argentinians off invading the Falklands. Our biggest threat is terrorism (Faslane being an attraction to such people) or being invaded and we definitely don’t have the level of conventional forces necessary to deal with the latter now. I mean to say if Putin landed troops in the North of Scotland, or surrounded our unprotected oilfields, what’s Westminster going to do about that? Fire a nuclear warhead at them?

    Labour in Scotland should now put their money where their mouth is and march alongside SNP supporters (all who want rid of these weapons) to demand that Westminster removes them from our Country. Yeah and before anyone points out that that could lead to all out war, lol, we hold hold demonstrations in different towns. I know that it’s not devolved but it would send a clear message to HamCam that even if we can’t get rid of it we don’t want it replaced to the tune of £170 billion and rising.

    Nick Robinson BBC “I believe in a Nuclear Holocaust”

    The Aftermath Of World Wide Nuclear War

  76. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Thepnr at 7.33

    I was at a meeting addressed by John Ainslie. He pointed out that the missiles were programmed so they could not fly towards the US

  77. Schrodingers cat says:

    I daresay there are a few sympathisers within the RN,

    Spot on dads, whether the uk could actually fire trident is probably a matter of opinion, not fact. The real reason behind this interview is because not everyone in the RN thinks trident is the way forward and would rather the money spent on other things.

  78. starlaw says:

    By the time the button is pushed .. we wont be here. Half of Scotland will be dead.

  79. Macart says:

    @Clootie 8.25pm

    That’s what I understood the situation to be Clootie.

  80. X_Sticks says:

    I’m sure westminster thinks it has launch control over Trident. I’m also sure the USA could prevent our using them if they want.

    It is called ‘buying’ the Trident weapons system, but I think we are basically subsidising the American nuclear arms programme, and indirectly Israel’s too.

    Our subsidy to that programme is what buys us our ‘special buddy’ status in American eyes.

    Trolls. I don’t know why you all bother. I’d just allow the squibs to fizz and spew their toxic waste and stand back and laugh at the spectacle. It will become clear whether they are actually here to engage rather than disrupt. Engage those warrant it, deny those who disrupt. Things are not always what they seem to be either 😉

  81. john king says:

    L/A SAYS
    “In my own personal view, I believe the cessation of progress towards Bagdad by his father played a a part in his, and Blair’s, decision to start Iraq war II, the scare story about W.M.D.s was the ideal cover for them at the time.”


    desert storm two was payback for his dad after a personal fallout with Saddam who mixed in the American hierachy’s circles and was very close to Bush snr.

  82. yesindyref2 says:

    It’s very difficult to find non-political sources, but this one is fair enough:

    The Trident II D5 fleet ballistic missile (FBM) is a three-stage, solid-propellant, inertial-guided ballistic missile developed by Lockheed Martin. The missile can carry multiple independently targeted reentry bodies for a maximum range of over 7,360km.


    The Trident II D5 guidance system is a stellar-aided inertial system composed of precision gyroscopes, accelerometers, a stellar tracker, and computer. The guidance system directs the missile on a rectified trajectory counterbalancing for submarine’s awkward position, in-flight effects and internal guidance calibratable parameters, upon launch of the missile.

    The guidance system works as the reference for maintaining missile stability and activating the reentry body separation for a ballistic trajectory.

  83. Valerie says:

    @Davy, the unionist troll

    You will no doubt have to wipe the spittle from your screen to read this far down, such is your level of indignation and anger at those concerned at harbouring WMDs in this country.

    You seem to have no recognition that this opposition is not limited to those seeking independence.
    Just Google for accidents at Faslane for a lengthy read. It’s an environmental disaster already, without any nuclear winter.

    Try a bit of empathy, instead of defending the indefensible.

    As a deterrent, they are doing a shite job, and Corbyn was right when he said it never helped on 9/11, or all the other terrorist incidents since.

    They are simply toys for boys, that like measuring their Dickson.

  84. Angra Mainyu says:

    Paula, are you some sort of self-appointed prefect? Earlier today you chastised me for swearing on Twitter and now, not content with managing the twittersphere, you have warned this place twice tonight to be responsible in discussing this nuclear issue.

    Where would we be without you keeping us right, eh…

  85. galamcennalath says:

    Want see the prediction map for a single ground burst Trident warhead?
    Enter, place Coulport, W-76 warhead, ground burst (consider it an accidental detonation) , select fallout.


    Tough, if you live in Highland Perthshire with typical SW prevailing winds!

  86. Schrodingers cat says:

    By the time the button is pushed .. we wont be here. Half of Scotland will be dead.

    I always like to point out that I think this arguement is a bit of a red herring since the chances of it being fired in anger are rather remote

    The danger of an accident poses a far more likely danger, accidents can and do happen

    If you overlay the contamination zone from Fukushima on top of faslane, it stretches from Inverness in the north to north London in the south. Where would we live?

  87. Robert Peffers says:

    @Calum Craig says: 2 November, 2015 at 5:48 pm:

    “I actually quite like RT. Just filter out the anti US stuff and it’s a much better source than the BBC.”

    Aye! Calum, but so is, “Trough the Looking Glass and what Alice saw there”.

  88. Angra Mainyu says:

    Yesindyref2, the game’s up… You’re pasting that stuff from the gadget descriptions on the Ann Summers’ website.

  89. heedtracker says:

    Schrodingers cat says:
    2 November, 2015 at 8:20 pm
    The war in the gulf mark 1,

    They left Saddam Hussein’s regime in power to prevent civil war or, what’s happened in the aftermath of the US/UK invasion. That regime annihilated several up risings but we’ll probably never know if Bomber Bliar, Crash Gordon etc gave any consideration to a post invasion Iraq with the removal Sadam. Or maybe we will, if Chilcot ever publishes. Honest and noble UKOk media certainly never ask Crash Gordon. Why would they.

    Considering there was clearly no US/Uk Iraq post invasion strategy, it’s highly likely there was none planned. And we let exact same war mongering red and blue tory world dump their nukes in Argyle. But the Major General says they can’t fire them anyway. Rule Britnatia.

    I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
    I’ve information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
    I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical
    From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical.

    Wish that keverage bloke would come on and explain why this guy is giving the UKOK nuke game away to the Russians?!!!

  90. Lenny Hartley says:

    Re Trident, a few years ago I was on the P.S. Waverley steaming between Arran and Cambelltown, a Trident sub was sitting stationary in the water whilst tenders were doing a crew and stores transfer.

    Why did they not wait until they got to Faslane? Could it be that they have only one sub that is serviceable and they did not want to waste any time in getting back out to patrol.

    If I remember correctly in the past wasn’t the trident budget included in the Foreign Office or Diplomatic Corps budget?

  91. scott says:

    Nuclear Waste. I don’t think I will try this honey.

  92. Phronesis says:

    Since you are more at risk of dying of a stroke or heart attack or increasingly zombie economic policies of UKOK in the West of Scotland a defence of a different kind is needed- good nutrition, less stress, exercise, secure employment,adequate medical care- a nuclear deterrent is rather useless for that.

    The proportion of money spent on Trident could be handed back to Scotland-for investment on more important things- addressing inequality, renewable energies etc. We could also develop our conventional army and defence forces for the real world tasks of a mature established democracy. It’s very logical-vote for our party of independence and we won’t have to concern ourselves with this debate for much longer.

  93. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    I feel very sorry for Kezia Dugdale. There is no more destructive sentiment about a politician than to be an object of pity

  94. Robert Peffers says:

    @Davy says: 2 November, 2015 at 6:03 pm:

    “The biggest propaganda myth by the ban the bomb warriors is we can not control the decision to launch ourselves. Absolute tosh.”

    Sheesh! Davy, I went aboard the very first UK nuclear powered submarine from the Pilot Cutter out by the Isle of May. I sailed in aboard her to Rosyth Dockyard.

    I was involved aboard every subsequent nuclear powered submarine until the day I retired. I had had moved into the Radar Bay by that time and worked on the submarine Sonar systems, (among other electronic and weapons gear).

    I then transferred into the RADIAC Lab and worked daily on every nuclear instrumentation on successive nuclear powered and armed vessel until I retired from the MOD.

    Don’t listen to all the bullshit told to you by Westminster.

  95. Alastair says:

    Re who presses the button.
    The scariest thing is that in our democracy where we have MP’s who are our representatives – is that we don’t know. Why not!!!

  96. frogesque says:


    For the record, I can think for myself and I think nuclear weapons are an obscenity.

    I don’t care whether we can or cannot push the proverbial with or without US approval

    I just want them gone, the fact that I AM an SNP member is irrelevant.

    I lived in Surrey during the Bay Of Pigs fiasco back in the Sixties. They were obscene then and they STILL are.

    Now, go have a little play on one of the many Mt blast radius sites and tell me if you think even one nuclear missile is worth it.

  97. john king says:

    Macart says

    The largest static aircraft carrier in the American fleet.

    USS UK.

    Who knew?”

    Weell Aa suppose its better than Churchills idea,

  98. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Fundellymundelly tinkering with the Scotland Bill has been given the blessing of Gordzilla.


    Cheers Gordon. That’s that sorted then, eh?

    His next mission will be to reassure the nation that Trident renewal is God’s Wish For Us All. Verily will he smite unbelievers with his asses juddering jaw, etc etc…

    GTF, Nawbagger-General.

  99. yesindyref2 says:

    Good find. What isn’t taken into account is the effect of an airburst over water. When Holy Loch had the Yanks there, it was reckoned that a single warhead burst at 1,000 feet would send a 100 foot tidal wave up and down the Clyde. It was bye-bye me, not from fire or radiation, but drowned dead.

    No idea how far it would go down the Clyde if over Faslane.

  100. Schrodingers cat says:

    we’ll probably never know if Bomber Bliar, Crash Gordon etc gave any consideration to a post invasion Iraq ……

    Doubt it, bush and Blair weren’t that clever…..incompetence more likely

  101. yesindyref2 says:

    @Lenny Hartley
    I think you’re right, I don’t think it used to be RN or even MOD.

  102. Since we are talking about things military,has the order for the 6 or more type 26 frigates been finalised and if so are they using Scottish steel in their build ?

  103. Paula Rose says:

    (O/T @ Angru Mainyu 8:45 – I’m no self-appointed anything – just making a couple of points that I personally felt were important – as regards Twitter I was ensuring that you could follow that thread – one sweary word and he blocks, did not intend to offend)

  104. Brian Powell says:

    Watching twitter, Labour’s meltdown is having a meltdown.

  105. Robert Peffers says:

    @Davy says: 2 November, 2015 at 6:31 pm:

    “Think about it or are you Nats that dumb !”

    Aye! Davy, Wir aa muckle gyte. It’s no oor faut wir ower wee, ower poor an ower stupid. Ye see, Davy Lad, wir no mentally programmed tae mak political decisions – mind ye wi dae mak afu guid whiskey.

  106. yesindyref2 says:

    @Scot Finlayson
    3 T26, not finalised.

  107. Schrodingers cat says:

    Not sure how smart kez is being here, it looks like jez has allowed the autonomous autonomy front for slab, but I exchange for dumping trident. I know the msp’s and ex mp’s broadly supported trident but with slabs vote share down to 25%, how many of their supporters are left wing? In an attempt to win back anti nuke voters, what will happen to their pro nuke supporters

    Can’t wait for the photo of ruthie straddling a trident missile bare back with the caption….only poofs don’t like trident…..

    Ruthie might be onto a winner here 🙂

    Keep an eye on the next polls

  108. yesindyref2 says:

    @Angru Mainyu
    I get the feeling a fair few people pay heed to warnings from Paula Rose, me included!

    Apparently it’s the heels.

  109. Lesley-Anne says:

    So we have oor wee Davy saying:

    Never seen such a display of ignorance over a topic in my entire life. Incredibile the level of hatred displayed. You all think an accident will happen and Scotland will light up. How stupid can you be !

    Well I’m guessing he understands that there has never ever been a nuclear related accident with regards nuclear submarnes then. Glad we got that cleared up then.

    Oh wait a wee minute. 😉

    More than 450 “shocking” nuclear safety incidents have been reported at Britain’s top secret Trident nuclear submarine base, new figures show.

    Apparently that cybernat loving newspaper the Daily Mirror appears to disagree. 😀

  110. Les Wilson says:

    Good debate here on Trident, lots of things coming out.
    Fact is, it is indefensable.
    We cannot use them, perhaps America could initiate them on their own.
    Yet,we pay for them to profit American defense companies.

    Are we frigging mad!

  111. Macart says:

    @John King

    Aye, they came up with some weird and wonderful ideas back then.

  112. Tam Jardine says:

    I would rather Obama had control than David Cameron, but then Obama is going to go soon, and God help us if Trump ends up the White House. We in Scotland certainly have zero control: when the vast majority of Scotland’s elected officials in Holyrood and Westminster oppose renewal it will go ahead regardless.

    These weapons are on our doorstep- an accidental detonation would leave the central belt fucked. The theoretical master of the weapons would, in that circumstance be entirely irrelevant.

    To support the retention, and indeed upgrading of Trident you would have to be sure that it provided an effective deterrent (see the

    You would have to accept the risk of accidental detonation as a price worth paying for this ‘security’.

    You would have to consider that it was morally defensible.

    You would have to be happy that the conventional armed forces of this country are well placed to deal with more likely threats and that the country and our interests were effectively defended from the most likely threats of the day.

    If you were convinced on all these issues, you would surely have to be convinced that the plan was affordable ie the UK could afford it.

    And finally, surely you would have to be convinced that Scotland was going to remain under Westminster control.

    I’m not convinced of any of these things. And to spend £167 billion on something you have to be very, very convinced.

    I know and understand why alot of our team have been taking the piss out of slab for their stance at odds with their leader and their bosses in London on Trident. I applaud their stance and hope it is something the SNP and Scottish Labour can work together on. When the grown ups make the decision next year at odds with the sovereign will of the people of Scotland (as our elected officials embody) it may eventually be the wake up call the Scottish people need.

    That said- when the decision is made, as it certainly will be, to renew trident, the press will probably just do another media blackout and go to 11 on the GBBO propaganda scale.

  113. Bill says:


    Only one boat on patrol, another preparing for patrol. One in refit and one in dry dock etc…

  114. Bill says:

    Actually, I’m tired explaining how Trident works, you wouldn’t listen in 2012, 2013 and months before indyref. So why should I bother.

  115. Lesley-Anne says:

    yesindyref2 says:
    2 November, 2015 at 9:31 pm

    @Angru Mainyu
    I get the feeling a fair few people pay heed to warnings from Paula Rose, me included!

    Apparently it’s the heels.

    I have it on good authority, not personal I hasten to add, Yes that under NO circumstances does anyone want to get anywhere near the heels of Paula. If you do just make damned sure you are close to an A&E department at the time! 😀

  116. Thepnr says:


    “Our biggest threat is terrorism (Faslane being an attraction to such people)”

    No, the biggest threat is our own elected government. The one that Scotland didn’t vote for.

    Many magnitudes more people have died in the UK in the last three years as a direct result of IDS policies by the Dept. of Work & Pensions due to sanctions and being found fit to work when clearly not than as a result of terrorism.

    “Campaigners demand welfare overhaul after statistics reveal 2,380 people died between 2011 and 2014 shortly after being declared able to work”

    Just today a Shelter report states 100,000 children will be homeless in the UK this Christmas. Terrorism doesn’t make children homeless, government policies do. Yet, these same governments tell us repeatably that “terrorism” is the threat.

    One can only imagine the real carnage coming down the line when Osbornes latest cuts take full effect. Yet we are led to believe that this is just the beginning, all of which is for the benefit of the most privileged and secure in our society. Something is off kilter.

    The “threat” of terrorism is a mirage designed to cow the electorate and it doesn’t even come close to the real threats the ordinary person faces.

    That of losing their jobs, yes starvation and suicide for those least able to cope, a loss of a roof over you head with no protection from the state. That is state terrorism.

    That is our lot, from our Lord Protectors all in the name of austerity. The threat of terrorism is happening before your very eyes everyday.

    The MSM want to keep you blind, time we all opened our eyes.

  117. yesindyref2 says:

    Yes, I’d guess that’s what it’s about, and he doesn’t mind being a bit misleading. After all, politically at the moment the UK couldn’t fire one without asking the Yanks, so he didn’t lie.

    What I did read some time ago which made sense is that the UK would be told in an ultimate crisis that they could fire at will without consultation, that makes sense. So techincally it’s independent, politically it isn’t. The same isn’t true the other way around, of course.

  118. Robert Peffers says:

    @yesindyref2 says: 2 November, 2015 at 7:10 pm

    ” … In normal circumstances the UK PM would consult with the US pressie.”

    Hilarious! “In normal circumstances”, normal! normal!

    Like ending the bloody whole World in nuclear warfare is NORMAL!

  119. Paula Rose says:

    Please Bill explain – I would appreciate your input and I’m sure others.

  120. yesindyref2 says:

    I think the second one is on standby ready for patrol in case the first one has problems – or gets sunk. As it were. No idea if it goes out to sea for standby duties.

  121. yesindyref2 says:

    From Rob Edwards who would have been the first to claim the incidents were more severe if they were:

    The MoD has not given details of all the incidents, but it stresses that they were minor and didn’t endanger the health of workers or the public. Forty-five of the events in 2013-14 were categorised as level C, meaning there was “moderate potential for future release or exposure, or localised release within a designated radiological controlled area.”

    The other 60 incidents were classified as level D. This is defined by the MoD as “low potential for release – but may contribute towards an adverse trend producing latent conditions.”

    Presumably there were 0 Class B incidents and 0 Class A ones.

  122. Schrödinger's cat says:

    Defo the heels

  123. Stuart says:

    Bless, it’s like seeing groundhog day for CND on the message boards here.

    All the usual old nonsense about Trident and nuclear weapons trotted out;

    “We can’t use it independently of the Americans, it needs their satellites to work, it can’t be used.”

    Tut, tut….

    I refer you to Para’s 78 & 80-82

    As for all of you saying it would not deter an attack, well useful to look at the Soviet archives from 1979;

    Note how despite NATO initiating a nuclear attack, the Soviets did not attack the NATO nuclear powers, though they did nuke other nations including neutral Austria.

    So using that as a yardstick giving up Trident would not make an indy Scotland any safer!

    As the Ukraine has found out, they gave their nukes back to Russia in 1994, look how well that worked out!

    Would Putin have dared support a Nationalist uprising or seized the Crimea if the Ukraine had retained its nuclear weapons?

    Even the Ukrainians think so!

    “Pavlo Rizanenko, a member of the Ukrainian parliament (Udar Party headed by Vitali Klitschko) told USA Today that Ukraine may have to arm themselves with their own nuclear weapons if the USA and other world leaders do not hold up their end of the agreement.

    He said “We gave up nuclear weapons because of this agreement. Now, there’s a strong sentiment in Ukraine that we made a big mistake.”

    He also said that, “In the future, no matter how the situation is resolved in Crimea, we need a much stronger Ukraine. If you have nuclear weapons, people don’t invade you.”

    Finally there seems to be some idea that Scotland is anti-Trident, this too is another Nationalist myth.

    “The reaction to my poll last week on Scottish attitudes to Trident has been fascinating, and telling. It is an article of faith for the SNP-CND axis that Scots are overwhelmingly and passionately opposed to nuclear weapons.

    My survey showing that most Scots want a replacement for Trident when it comes to the end of its useful life, and that more are in favour of the UK’s nuclear submarines continuing to be based in Scotland than are opposed, has therefore caused a bit of a flap.”

    As no doubt will Lord Ashcrofts poll findings to some folk on here, “but he’s a Tory” I can see folk saying.

    Well Nationalists were happy enough to use his polls when they showed the SNP were on course to win the Holyrood elections, weren’t you?

  124. yesindyref2 says:

    @Robert Peffers
    Yes, it’s possible I put it better in a later posting.

  125. call me dave says:


    We’ll have to get Ruthie in that one.

  126. Davy says:

    What with that roaster complaining of my spelling an that Peffers bloke declaring himself an authority on systems and everything nuclear, how do you know I didn’t have anything to do wae midsiles ? One things for sure, I doubt very much Peffers had any idea beyond his little walter mitty world. You loose the argument so start personal attack. This fails and move to inferiority complex. No wonder Scotland is wakening up to how lousy the SNP are.

  127. Petra says:

    @ Thepnr says at 9:39 pm

    (Petra … Our biggest threat is terrorism (Faslane being an attraction to such people).

    ”No, the biggest threat is our own elected government. The one that Scotland didn’t vote for.”

    I thought that would just be taken as a given Thepnr. In fact we could split hairs and say that every dismal thing that happens in this country is not down to our (un) elected government but the people that control them.

  128. Tam Jardine says:

    PS- couple of weird repetition loop things in the last post. Just poured beer into my shoe mid post… think the rest makes sense

  129. yesindyref2 says:

    Calm down Davy, my typing is often atrocious, I’m a fast typer ad make loads of mistakes. It;s what’s said is important, no thow it’s spelt.

    That was the uncorrecte version, and better than normal.

  130. Lenny Hartley says:


    If they had one ready for Patrol why would they crew and load stores on the surface in full view of any passing ship, they would do as sop and transit to Faslane and service the boat that has just come off patrol. They would only replenish at sea if they needed a quick turn around and wanted their only operational boat back on patrol asap.

  131. Schrodingers cat says:

    Then again, if

    Major General Patrick Anthony John Cordingley DSO DSc FRGS

    Says its true, who am I to disagree, folks on Britain first are gonna hate him

    Wae dae midsiles….. I fuckin hope Davy boy, I fuckin hope not

  132. yesindyref2 says:

    @Lenny Hartley
    I vaguely remember a sub sitting off Great Cumbrae for a few hours or a day or so 2 or 3 years ago, I think it was an Astute not a Vanguard. It might have been HMS Astute after sandbanking from the timing, not sure.

    If they were taking stores off, perhaps it was to lighten her before berthing up at Faslane, maybe even for a checkover.

  133. Capella says:

    The idea that the UK state deliberately spread the notion that the UK could not fire its weapons independently to delude the CND seems to fly in the face of the Dr Strangelove doctrine. What is the point of a nuclear deterrent if you pretend you can’t use it?

    But if I were Mr Putin or Mr Xi Jinping, I would target most of my nuclear warheads at cities like London, where the decisions are made. With an extra one for Faslane.

  134. Paula Rose says:

    Is it difficult to take a submarine out to sea from Faslane unseen?

  135. In the pub on Sunday evening we had a vote after heated debate to scrap Trident renewal and the building of new class of subs to carry it.

    My hope is to join with the almost autonomous Scottish Labour and use our combined mandate to force the UK government to scrap this abomination.

    Anyone from the almost autonomous Scottish Labour reading this could you get in touch if you want to combine our equal bargaining power.

  136. Angra Mainyu says:

    Tam Jardine: ” applaud their stance and hope it is something the SNP and Scottish Labour can work together on…”


    The SLAB Trident vote allows us to say that the two largest political parties in Scotland, representing over 75% of the population, are now aligned against the renewal of Trident.

    That’s important, or at least it might be. I think SLAB will probably regret this vote but as it stands it serves our position.

  137. Thepnr says:


    Just putting an alternative point of view and one I want people to hear. The neo-cons, neo-libs always use “terrorism” as justification for increasing military spending and decreasing welfare.

    Personally? I’m sick of it, it is all lies and it is time we focused on the real threat. The transfer of wealth from poor to rich. The total dominance of the corporate media by the wealthy and supporters of these neo-cons.

    The dehumanising of the unemployed, disabled and mentally ill by describing them as “benefit scroungers”. The fact that people are driven to death through despair because of their circumstances created by austerity and being denied funds to eat forcing them to foodbanks.

    None of this is acceptable to me in any way.

    You should never take it as a given that the word is out there. You should be screaming it from the rooftops. This so called democracy of ours is being ripped apart.

    That reality deserves to be written and spoken loud and clear.

  138. Harry McAye says:

    Davy it’s “lose”, “loose” is your grasp on reality.

  139. Lenny Hartley says:

    Paula Rose

    Since the Antares all subs transiting the Clyde including V class have to do so on the surface.
    Ain’t seen any for a while so guess they do it at night these days.

  140. Angra Mainyu says:

    Paula: “is it difficult to take a submarine out to see from Faslane unseen?”

    Yes, and it will be even more difficult when we decide to dam the Clyde at Dunoon…

  141. ahundredthidiot says:

    I would never advocate the use of nuclear weapons

    No matter how tempting a target Washington makes itself

    Or Wall Street for that matter

    Or…..shit…..I could go on……maybe we should keep ’em!!

  142. Clootie says:

    …yes the governments and military are always open and honest about nuclear incidents. Unfortunately they all have a record of lying to us and if they lie about the big stuff why should I believe reports that we have had no serious leaks on the Clyde.

    Perhaps in 40 or 50 years we will learn the truth.

    Do not trust governments to tell the truth

  143. Alastair says:

    Carmicheal’s legal team back in court tomorrow to try and stop TV coverage of next weeks trial.

  144. Lesley-Anne says:

    Paula Rose says:
    2 November, 2015 at 10:20 pm

    Is it difficult to take a submarine out to sea from Faslane unseen?

    It would be even harder Paula if there were numerous fishing nets strung across the narrow entrance to the Gare Loch. I hear subs and fishing nets don’t really work all that well together. 😀

  145. North chiel says:

    I would much prefer Nicola asked the Scottish people
    by way of a promise of a referendum on the trident nuclear
    Base being located in Scotland in the SNP manifesto for
    Holyrood 2016.
    A straight yes or no to clarify this issue and hopefully “send
    a message ” to Westminster.Thereafter if the “UK” Parliament
    and the London parties wish to renew, they may well have to find
    an alternate location perhaps “closer to home”?

  146. INDEPENDENT says:

    Whilst enjoying the cut and thrust of the debate on this most serious of topics.
    I have been fortunate enough to watch and listen to the whole debate.
    I feel Major General Patrick Cordingley, who was also a senior member of MI6. Knows a lot more about the skeletons and goings-on at Westminster and the MOD than trolls and shouters’ here.
    No offence meant.
    Ref it being on RT. Dave says the Russians’ already would know. Erm I think you will find it was broadcast from RT London.
    Primarily because the MAJ-GEN couldn’t get BBCPRAVDS to air his concerns
    Aggh The Special Relationship and protocols.
    Anybody remember lovely old Ronald Reagan and his besotted girlfriend Margaret Hilda, bestest buddies.
    Oops Grenada. Foreign country invaded in breach of all International law.
    Finally 1982 why didn’t Margaret Hilda, send an unarmed ballistic missile into General Galtier’s Palace with the warning the next one will be armed. That would have been real deterrent and saved a lot of lives.
    Oops again! she was behind by miles in the polls.

  147. Lenny Hartley says:


    They were loading up the Trident sub with stores, I saw one crew coming off boat and new one going on. It was a Trident sub, I know what subs look like from an early age I have been interested
    In ships, even had the Polis at my door in 1971 looking for camera film which contained close up photos of hm Renown a Polaris boat. They must have taken my photo from the conning tower as I
    Was snapping them 🙂

  148. Davy says:


    If I was Putin, I would target porkheid, tanadice and easter road. Clear the rubbish out an start again.

  149. Legerwood says:

    Capella @ 10.16 pm

    In a few years Mr Xi Jinping won’t need to fire missiles at the UK all he will have to do is flick a switch at Hinckley Point and the other nuclear power station the Chinese are going to build. Simples.

  150. Robert Peffers says:

    @Davy says: 2 November, 2015 at 7:37 pm:

    “You all think an accident will happen and Scotland will light up. How stupid can you be !”

    Oh! Aye! Davy, Wir aa stupid richt enouch!

    I’m now going to tell you a true story. One of the first jobs I had to do on the nuclear submarine was to design, build and install a decent, “foolproof”, system of supplying services into the reactor compartment while there was construction work done on the hull between the USAsian reactor section and the fore and after designed UK sections of the boat. The reactor, of course could not be shut down completely.

    This whole system included the circulation pumps for the coolant and other vital services to the actual reactor. And of course alarms. Each system had five different supplies and if one failed it automatically switched in another supply. It all worked well and was extensively tested.

    Now there was only one way to get external services into the reactor compartment – through the main airlock door. Still and all the RN stationed trained firewatchers everywhere as the construction work involved welding.

    Each external service was fitted with a quick release joint so that in dire emergency the lines of electric supplies, coolant, oil and even compressed air and ventilation air could be disconnected and the door closed.

    Then the inevitable happened and a spark from the welder set fire to the poly sheets that were used to control dust as the dust would become irradiated.

    The well trained Jolly Jack Tar stationed as a firewatcher at the reactor door sprung into action – grabbed an enormous fire axe from the bulkhead and proceeded to chop each and every vital power line, water, coolant oil and air line dropping the cut ends through the reactor door and closing it.

    There was live electric cables, oil lines, coolant, water and a good supply of air but the star of the show was the several compressed air lines which of course flew about out on all control.

    At this point the fire service promptly arrived upon the scene and were already masked up and had bottles of air strapped on their backs ready to face whatever danger they might meet … … … but with the tanks on their backs they were unable to pass through the outer hull door to gain access to the vessel. Meanwhile, as far as we knew, the workers in the reactor compartment were trapped in an environment that was filling up with poison gas from the burning polythene.

    Now remember we now had a nuclear reactor without any circulating coolant and there was an obvious threat of a thermal reactor runaway.

    And you have the temerity to say, “You all think an accident will happen and Scotland will light up. How stupid can you be”.

    Davy – I’ve never worked so hard in my life to get all those services back up and running again before Scotland did light up. You do realise those quick release connectors were designed to shut off the services when they were released and we had also fitted connectors to the original supplies just for such emergencies so that we could plug into the lines that went through bulkhead glands. Thanks to Jolly Jack Tar we had been left with open ended lines.

    There is a very old rule, Davy, If something can go wrong – it will.

    Now here’s a wee bit of research for you. Find out how many, “Incidents”, have happened at the Clyde Base since the first subs arrived there. I’ll warrant it will surprise you.

  151. Socrates MacSporran says:

    We are always told; the first duty of any government is the defence of the realm. The pro-Trident argument is that, by having Trident, we deter any other nation from bombing us.

    This is pure bullshit – Trident is there so the Prime Minister of the UK&NI can swan around international conferences loking important: “We’re one of the big nations – we’ve got our own nukes”.

    But, the biggest threat to our peace, we are also told, is potential terrorists. Funny how, having our own nukes hasn’t deterred ISIS, Al Qaeda etc.

    Scrap Trident, spend money on better anti-terrorism measures, more, better-equipped surface vessels and aircraft – oh, and properly equipping our defence forces, who should not be used as back-up to America causing bother around the world.

  152. heedtracker says:

    But if I were Mr Putin or Mr Xi Jinping, I would target most of my nuclear warheads at cities like London, where the decisions are made. With an extra one for Faslane.

    Post nuclear war apocalypse winters are hypothetically quite long and usually end in human extinction hypotheses. UKOK nukes would only add a small bit to the resultant planetary destruction in WW3.

    Tactically its hard to see who pig fancier Cammers or a buffoon like future PM Bojo might fire Trident at.

    Is a passport swap for 5000 Falklanders and some enraged humiliated UKOKists at say the Daily Heil, really worth turning Buenos Aires into a radiated solid glass coffin for several million Argentinians. I know right, there are some great British psychos who think anything what UKOK does is just great.

    This all probably explains why the Major General is on RT telling them, that yes the UK has nukes, but at the very least people of planet Earth, 600 war crazed twerps/MP’s in Westminster won’t be allowed to nuke any of you and after Iraq, that’s probably all that people everywhere want to hear, desperately.

  153. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:


    I refer you to Para’s 78 & 80-82”

    They would say that, would they not? It’s rather harder to see where Maj-Gen Cordingley has any reason to lie.

  154. Angra Mainyu says:

    Legerwood, if my experience of Chinese gadgets is anything to go by, they won’t even need to flick a switch. China can’t even get wind-up toy minions right.

    Can you imagine the instruction manual the Chinese will include with that power station?

  155. daisy walker says:


    Ummm, I was going to say something, I forget. Think it was profound … Bugger.

    Ahh weell at least it’s a short post.

    Best wishes and peace to all


  156. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “At what point and how does the USA get to invoke any kind of veto?”

    That one’s easy (as a speculation, I have no idea of the reality) – launch codes don’t work without a component of the code being supplied by the US.

    The US firing the missiles without UK permission is vastly less plausible or feasible, but nobody’s suggesting that.

  157. Tam Jardine says:


    On fire the night mate. We are discussing spending £167 billion on a new fleet of trident submarines at a time when supporting working people on tax credits is meant to be unaffordable. It is truly mind-boggling.

  158. Graeme says:

    Everything to do with trident is top secret. This talk of codes, GPS, launch authorisations etc. is all speculation and guess work. Even the top speed of the submarines is a closely guarded secret, never mind the launch sequence.

    And I don’t think Cordingley is an expert. As far as I’m aware, he’s never had anything to do with the nuclear deterrent. Put it this way, if he knew much about it he wouldn’t speak publically about it.

    Better person to quote is Portillo as he actually is in the know. But from what I can recall he didn’t say it couldn’t be launched independently. He only said it wasn’t independent. Which it isn’t, we couldn’t maintain it without them. But that doesn’t necessarily mean we couldn’t launch it on our own.

  159. yesindyref2 says:

    “launch codes”

    From wiki:

    At the end of the Cold War, the US Navy installed devices to prevent rogue commanders persuading their crews to launch unauthorised nuclear attacks. These devices prevent an attack until a launch code had been sent by the Chiefs of Staff on behalf of the President. The UK took a decision not to install equivalent devices onto Vanguard on the grounds that an aggressor might be able to eliminate the British chain of command before a launch order had been sent

  160. Capella says:

    @ Tam Jardine
    Well the weapons industry needs a constant supply of tax payer money to pay the massive CEO bonuses. And don’t forget that Sir Robert Carr, Chair of BAE systems, is also now Vice Chair of the BBC.

    Political Science by Randy Newman sums it up:

  161. yesindyref2 says:

    By the way, sheer logic will tell anyone that the “launch codes” is a myth. It’s the sub that “launches” the missile, not the missile. The sub in question is the Vanguard, built at Barrow. Barrow is in England, not the US. Therefore the boat, and its “launch codes” which it doesn’t have, are under the control of the captain and crew of the sub.


    Launch codes. In the UK it’s what we call pork launcheon meat.

  162. Graeme says:

    Oh actually I just re-watched what Portillo said:

    “…we couldn’t possibly use it without the Americans…”

    Still not entirely clear if he means it would be politically impossible or technically.

  163. Davy says:

    What Graeme said is most likely the truth here. When I was in the forces, I worked on certain things and they were top secret at the time. Even today I would never even discuss anything about it. This is why I am convinced mr Peffers is a complete drama queen and a walt. I would never bleat it out on a web forum what I know. It is probably obsolete by now but you never know. When you get vetted, you sign for life regarding certain things. Blabbing about fires and bravery on board a submarine would not be likely from the people I know and have worked with. We just don’t do that. Absolute no discussion. I believe you may have had a minor role but nothing as important as you make out. Sorry but you are just bigging it all up for your cause.

  164. yesindyref2 says:

    Yes, it needs the US Trident missiles to carry the UK warhead, basically because the UK missile program didn’t work out very well so an agreement with the Yanks was made to use Trident, partly because of development costs as well.

    There is nuclear sharing and it’s two ways, as the UK has knowledge via Aldermaston the US is interested in.

  165. Robert Graham says:

    A plea to all on here , don’t acknowledge, reply to , or in anyway engage with click bait Dave and his lonely friends don’t give this person any reason to be on here you’re wasting your valuable time not this persons they are feeding off your comments, don’t encourage them, just a thought .

  166. Capella says:

    @ yesindyref2
    Logic doesn’t tell you that at all.
    It is not “the sub” that launches missiles. It is a human, probably through the medium of computer software.
    The hardware may be built at Barrow. But where is the software produced?
    The captain may press the button, but the software determines the destination and timing.

    I fear your conclusions are based on false premises. Or as Flann O’Brien puts it “Your syllogism is fallacious being based on licensed premises.”

  167. yesindyref2 says:

    A good resource for anyone wanting to get some background for the Trident debate, and I doubt this is the end of it somehow, is this one I refound:

    The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) works to provide science-based analysis of and solutions to protect against catastrophic threats to national and international security. Specifically, FAS works to reduce the spread and number of nuclear weapons, prevent nuclear and radiological terrorism, promote high standards for nuclear energy’s safety and security, illuminate government secrecy practices, as well as track and eliminate the global illicit trade of conventional, nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

    FAS was founded in 1945 by many of the Manhattan Project scientists who wanted to prevent nuclear war and is one of the longest serving organizations in the world dedicated to reducing nuclear threats and informing the public debate by providing technically-based research and analysis on these issues.

    At least it’s going to help give some fact-base behind opinion, as in this page about Trident launch:

  168. scotspine says:

    Regards Davy.

    Undoubtedly one of these right wing, ex forces has beens, who hang around a site called Arrse and snigger and sneer at others including non military types, folk from countries we have barged in to with violence, anyone with an opinion they disagree with and most of all, anything to do with Scottish self determination.

    They also like using military buzz words like “ally”, ” Walt” and probably refer lots to a weapon system known as SLR.

    Quite sad really.

  169. yesindyref2 says:

    Actually technically it IS the sub that launches the missile, with compressed air. It’s only after the missile breaches the surface that the main rocket engine fires.

    As as I said, if you control the boat, you control the launch. 100.0000000000000000000000000000%.

  170. X_Sticks says:

    @Alastair & O/T

    Help the Orkney4 campaign to get Carmichael out & GET PERKS!

    What’s not to like?

  171. Chic McGregor says:

    Tristram *unt should change his surname to Shandy. at least then he might be more beleieable.

  172. Davy says:

    Regards scotspine

    Never been on arrse, I have been trained on your SLR like everyone else though. The only sad thng is that you can’t accept the possibility of me being somehow involved in anything other than shooting locals in the dessert. That’s fine by me. I have absolutely nothing to prove. When you HAVE walked the walk, you dont need to talk the talk as far as I’m concerned.

    Night night

  173. Robert Peffers says:

    @Davy says: 2 November, 2015 at 9:55 pm:

    ” … One things for sure, I doubt very much Peffers had any idea beyond his little walter mitty world.”

    Ah” Davy lad, do you even know what the Initials, “RADIAC”, stand for? I spent my whole working life in the Mod as a Civilian Craftsman.

    Besides many years in Rosyth Dockyard I spent some in the Weapons Section, some in the Instrument section, lots in the Radio, Radar and Sonar workshop and over 15 years in the RADIAC Lab.

    Go look up what a RADIAC Lab is. In those days the Rosyth RADIAC covered all the area from Newcastle to the Northern Isles and that included every last instrument on all RN vessels in Scottish waters plus a share in the instruments in RN stores throughout the UK.

    It included also the built-in instrumentation on installations, ships and submarines at the Clyde Base.

    All instruments must be legally tested and calibrated annually even if not in use. As for insults you have been throwing them around like chimps throw shite. Fact is you are a total numptie and too damned dim to realise it.

    Now I’m done with you. Bye! Bye!

  174. yesindyref2 says:

    It’s good night from him.
    And it’s good night from me!

    Work to do.

  175. scotspine says:

    @ Davy.

    What kind of dessert is that? Baked Alaska, Eves pudding or Spotted Dick?

  176. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    “…shooting locals in the dessert.”

    Mmmmm… Perchance, along the lines of shooting those that swim around in that which is yellow and dangerous?
    (Maybe I should have deserted this train of thought…)

    Many mentions above of a famous line from a famous song –

    “If the button is pushed (there’s no running away)” – and nobody linked to, probably, one of the finest songs of the 60s.
    I played this in Jaspers night club, on the Friday evening after the first Gulf War had commenced, the night before.

  177. yesindyref2 says:

    There’s always this one:

  178. dakk says:

    The idea that the US would sanction the supply of a weapon system that could if turned against it,or sabotaged could destroy its biggest cities does not compute with this robot.

    Just why would they not retain control over the potential destruction of such a weapon being sold from their shores ?

    Stuart @ 9.52 used the Ukraine/Russia analogy for why Ukraine should have retained nuclear weapons to avoid aggression.Well it works both ways.

    It shows how a close ally can become an enemy and therefore why the US would always retain ultimate control of warhead discharge.

    Get real.The Major General has told us as much.Not that I need to be told.

  179. Tackety Beets says:

    BDTT @ 12.27

    Loved that Barry M toon.

    Cringy admission, on the evening of the First Golf War , I too was banging oot da toe tappin toones to circa 600 ravers in da Club.

    I was asked to announce some spiel about the invasion had began etc reluctantly I complied.

    One of my many lifetime cringy moments , thanks for reminding me . Smiley fing.

  180. Robert Peffers says:

    @Graeme says: 2 November, 2015 at 11:01 pm:

    “Everything to do with trident is top secret. This talk of codes, GPS, launch authorisations etc. is all speculation and guess work. Even the top speed of the submarines is a closely guarded secret, never mind the launch sequence.”

    For the love of Pete, Graeme, how do you keep secret the performance of a boat when people are on trials with the bloody things they have just refitted?

    I’ve no idea how it is done now but in my time in the Dockyard the boat did not belong to the RN until the RN test team signed it off after refit as having passed all trials. Then it did not even belong to the RN until it was commissioned into service.

    When we did trials the naval crew sailed the ship for us and each system was supervised by the Naval Trials team until they accepted the system and signed if off and we handed it over to the navy

    There were several trials in dry dock and several in the non-tidal basin before sea trials even began. There were also weapons trials and you imagine we didn’t know all about the systems or the boat’s performance. We had just refitted the bloody thing?

    I sailed in everything and flew in everything the RN had to offer. In fact one of the most frightening things I ever did was the compulsory submarine emergency escape drills.

    You had to escape from the sub underwater up the conning tower. That is you entered the watertight doors into the conning tower. They flooded the tower and you opened the top door to escape and hopefully reach the surface still alive. It sure put escaping from a simulated ditched helicopter in a tank in the shade.

  181. Tackety Beets says:

    Paula Rose etc

    Ref Trident detection leaving Faslane etc .

    Pre Ref some 18 months ago I did a lengthy post explaining why Faslane is one of the best places in the world for the base.

    As I understand it .

    Short version. Deep water , islands on west coast and strong tides between islands are well documented due to nowt between us an USA.
    Subs are generally detected by thermals. If sub leaves in midst of strong tides via the narrows between the islands the power and turbulence of the tides destroys any chance of any thermal detection.

  182. dakk says:

    ‘the turbulence of the tides destroys any chance of thermal detection’

    Doesn’t that leave Faslane open to hostile sub surveillance as well ?

  183. Robert Peffers says:

    @Davy says: 2 November, 2015 at 11:24 pm:

    “Blabbing about fires and bravery on board a submarine would not be likely from the people I know and have worked with.”

    Good God, Davy, you really are as thick as mince. I said I was done with you but that one is so stupid I’ll make an exception.

    I told you that story for the very good reason that such matters cannot be secret, per se. They are recorded and reported, as has already been commented upon on this forum. Where the hell did you imagine the statistics about nuclear accidents at the Clyde Base came from?

    The MOD is not subject to Health and Safety law but it is subject to Nuclear incident regulations and, believe me, they are stringent. My record of exposure to radiation and contamination will still be on record long after the mawks have crawled out of me.

    In around 20 years I only got contaminated once while working on board a submarine. Not something you would want to experience.

    I kid you not if it doesn’t wash off they scrub you until they get the contamination away and that usually means drawing blood. The irony was the instruments they used to read the contamination all bore my signature as having repaired, tested and calibrated them.

    But, Hey! Davy, you just go on believing I’m a Walter Mitty and daft enough to actually tell you something that is on the top secret list if it makes you happy.

    It happened when I was being pulled up from behind a badly contaminated coolant pump. A bolt tore through the protective suit and contaminated coolant got inside the suit.

    Everyone is monitored as they leave the reactor compartment and again to get out of the restricted area and they picked it up right away.

    It was not a pleasant experience.

  184. Tackety Beets says:


    Good point. I will put that to my source at next meeting.

    Robert P may have a view.

    Anyway more important lets Get Trident outta there.

  185. yesindyref2 says:

    Faslane was home to Polaris since 1968, followed by Trident without gap. That’s 47 years. Without Successor, Vanguard will run out in about 2030 for a total of 62 years. With Successor until 2060, that’s 92 years.

    Meanwhile nukes have been at various bases in England since around 1956 with the RAF and USAC, but were removed from service in 1998. 42 years full stop.

    Time somebody else had them.

  186. yesindyref2 says:

    USAF! (/ SAC)

  187. yesindyref2 says:

    If it’s not too late for the poll, as well as the obvious question about renewal (I’d be a don’t know), how about one “would you want Trident to be removed from Scotland somewhere else in a reasonable time, say 10-12 years?”. I’d be a YES.

  188. Lenny Hartley says:

    Davy 11:24

    As a former member of HM forces I say you are talking shite, perhaps if you are stupid enough to be brainwashed into believing that the U.K. deserves your loyalty and respect you might consider you are at one with their little game and keep their secrets. However, most ex servicemen I know have a different opinion. I was a young Brit when I joined up, didn’t take me long to find out
    That being Scots meant you were a second class subject in the great British armed forces, I truly believed we were all British Together until I experienced at first hand the blatant racism against myself and the other Scots serving with me.

    In the early seventies I was British , I was a member of the SNP shortly after leaving the forces in the late seventies. Any secrets I knew back then were part of a game and that’s all it was, what was the moral of the crew on Russian Nukes? who was the Kgb man onboard? Who was shagging the Captains wife? All tittle tattle and as much use as the pish you are spouting on this forum.

    Do us a favour and be a good little Troll and fuck off.

  189. scotspine says:

    @ Lenny

    Yes, remember being referred to, or addressed as FRISB?

    For the uninitiated….”Fucking Repulsive, Ignorant, Scottish Bastard”

    Sometimes FRISGB (G for Ginger of course – regardless if you were or not)

    Said with affection mind, like everything else in this Union….”Porridge Wog, Sweaty, Jockanese etc”

    Such is the high esteem we were/are held in.

  190. Robert Louis says:

    In case nobody else has pointed it out, there was an excellent analysis of Trident by Scott Minto on this site, during the referendum year.

    It is well worth a read.

    Sadly, because 6% more of the electorate voted NO to Scotland resuming statehood and independence than voted YES, we still have these cursed nuclear bombs sitting just a stone’s throw from Scotland’s most densely populated city.

    Trident is a f*****g obscenity. Those b******* in England responsible for basing it right in the middle of such a densely populated area of Scotland should be shot (literally). If they are so bleeping safe, berth them on the river Thames – outside Money’s hoose, preferably.

    The policy of the Labour party is still the same. They are in favour of Trident being dumped in Scotland, and want to pay for its renewal. Red Tories, indeed.

    I regard renewal of Trident, against the wishes of the people of Scotland, as more than a good enough reason for another indy referendum.

    No other country anywhere in the world would tolerate this for one second. Not ever. So why should Scotland?

  191. Andrew McLean says:


    yes it was and still is as you say just a game, the reason why the general was comfortable speaking on a Russian program was he knew the Russians already know everything, just as we in the west know everything about them.

    Official secrets are there to keep the population in the dark, as much as to confuse the opponents as to our intentions. They already know the how’s and whys, it’s the when that’s the secret.

    We are all just mushroom’s kept in the dark and fed shit!

    The only truly interesting thing I ever heard on this subject was the test the American airforce did, they pretended to the firing crew that an attack was underway, they didn’t like the results, neither did some of the crew.

    It truly is a Mad World

    Read The Third World War by General Bob Hackket!.

  192. Fat Dave says:

    Nationalism and Socialism. Two good reasons to loathe the SNP for the racist fascist scum they undoubtedly are.
    Moronic to believe that the UK doesn’t have complete control over the nuclear deterrent. A tired old myth trotted out by idiots.
    Anti- Scottish prejudice in the military. Codswallop. Dry your eyes, sweetie and get on with it.

  193. Andrew McLean says:


    IMHO It’s situated exactly where the philosophy of MAD states it should be, not remote, but with the correct population.

    Why else would it not be situated somewhere truly remote, after all we do have an abundance of truly remote places to hide them.

    The rest, don’t get hung up on the who has control, that’s just a device to confuse. Take it to its logical conclusion, or are we just pissed it may not be our finger, our decision? Really?

  194. Silverytay says:

    If my memory serves me right did the M.O.D themselves during the referendum not state that Trident could not be moved to Devenport as in the event of an accident the casualty rate would be unacceptable .

    That statement itself tells me all I need to know , get them out of Scotland A.S.A.P

  195. Andrew McLean says:


    To play devils advocate, where would you suggest?

    Sad fact is if a full strike hit England, those not killed and still fit to travel would migrate north, there may only be a few million out of the fifty or so, then our civil structure would collapse, food would run out for the vast majority, we would be in a military state supported by civilians, police etc, this is first week, radiation would spread north, week two most areas would be lawless, week three protected areas would come under increasing stress, week four, groups of strength would emerge,
    Week five, population would continue to decrease vastly, hunger sickness suicide and violence main cause, week six, those alive would envy the dead!

    If you don’t believe me, and this was my job, tell me what you would do if your family were starving and the man next door had food, as him nicely?

  196. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Nationalism and Socialism. Two good reasons to loathe the SNP for the racist fascist scum they undoubtedly are.”

    I’m willing to bet you quite a lot of money that Major-General Patrick Cordingley isn’t in the SNP. So why is it you think he’s lying about it?

  197. Andrew McLean says:

    And why are you asking rhetorical questions? 🙂

  198. Silverytay says:

    Andrew McLean
    I don’t doubt what you are saying ,all I was pointing out that if the risk is unacceptable for Devenport then it is unacceptable for Scotland .

    I would rather get rid of the things completely but as long as Westminster prefers to have their phallic toys then let them keep them in their back yard .

    I just want them out of my country .

  199. dakk says:

    Fat Dave 7.48

    ‘Nationalism and Socialism’


    One good reason to loathe fat BritNat parasites for the scum they undoubtedly are.

  200. Andrew McLean says:


    The risk to Davenport if we are taking full out, is the risk to us all!
    I heard once the best worse case sinariio was well spaced blast zones around population centres as this would be more humane. It would also make it easier to control the remaining poulation.
    Remember it’s all or nothing, get them airborne or lose them. Their is no such beast as a tit for tat realise.

  201. Iain More says:

    The Daily Heil writes the truth sometimes – Did you take the medication today?

  202. J Galt says:

    I hope the distinguished (and evidently courageous) Model Major General does not list Hillwalking among his pastimes unlike a certain former Foreign Secretary.

  203. scotspine says:

    @ fatso Dave

    Should your post not have read ” dry your eyes sweaty”?

    Cos thats what you meant.

    Yet another member of 77th Brigade, or another retired has been clinging to the tatters of the inglorious Imperial British Military.

    Why are all these folk called Dave?

  204. Chic McGregor says:

    To quote the late great Carl Sagan:

    “The nuclear arms race is like two sworn enemies standing waist deep in gasoline, one with three matches, the other with five.”

  205. Will Podmore says:

    A very interesting debate. It raises the question, how much independence does any NATO member have?

  206. Andrew McLean says:


    well you did ask?


Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top