"With a lot of energy and expenditure down the drain," strategies for the so-called Ark have been canceled.
Top News & Analysis
NEW Motion picture PROJECT-TALKWORKS FILMS 2009 (First Sequence) ‘Talking About Nuclear Disarmament’ http://www.talkworks.info/Talkworks_Films/WELCOME.html Prominent mil…
Video Score: 5 / 5
They would have to deploy one to the West of Ireland to cover what we had
withdrawn. No doubt they also have one deployed in the Northern Indian
Ocean to cover the subcontinent and the mid-east. This means that between 4
and 6 would be utilised to provide the nuclear umbrella to treaty areas of
responsibility. That leaves very few submarines available to be on station
near Russia to undertake the primary function, detterence against a major
attack by Russia.
@PosthumousAddress The US, as I recall, as fourteen Ohio class submarines.
At any one time, one third would be on station, one third transitting or in
dock, and another third undergoing refit. Let us assume, however, that they
always have at least seven at sea. If we got rid of the Vanguard fleet,
then in addition to covering the Atlantic and Indian ocean (one or two
each), and at least one on station near China/Japan and the Russian Far
East (if not two)
Just in answer to some of your comments, Sir Hugh. It’s fair to say that
Britain does not have an “independent” deterrent. I think, for all intents
and purposes, our four Vanguard subs are basically just the equivalent to
the US of another four Ohios that they don’t have to pay for. The question
is, if Britain was to scrap it’s own Trident, would that leave enough
capability in the hands of the Americans to cover our friends and allies
with a nuclear umbrella?
very well spoken .