Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
March 16, 2021

Britain's Nuke Increase Is In Breach Of Its NPT Obligations

Less than a month ago the British government pleaded with Iran to 'come back into compliance' with the nuclear deal:

“I don’t think that we should be sending a signal that we are going to overlook this non-compliance or just brush it under the carpet,” James Cleverly, Britain’s junior foreign minister who covers the Middle East and North Africa, told the BBC.

“This is in Iran’s hands, they are the ones breaching the conditions of the JCPOA, they are the ones that can do something about this, and they should come back into compliance,” he said.

In fact it is the U.S. and its European proxies, including Britain, which are not in compliance with the JCPOA. Iran has exceeded some technical limits of the nuclear deal. But it is allowed to do so under §26 and §37 of the deal as the other parties are not in compliance with their duties under the deal.

It is also Britain which is now threatening to break another nuclear treaty:

Britain is lifting the cap on the number of Trident nuclear warheads it can stockpile by more than 40%, Boris Johnson will announce on Tuesday, ending 30 years of gradual disarmament since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The increased limit, from 180 to 260 warheads, is contained in a leaked copy of the integrated review of defence and foreign policy, seen by the Guardian. It paves the way for a controversial £10bn rearmament in response to perceived threats from Russia and China.

The UK has signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a nuclear weapon state. Britain, by increasing its stockpile of nuclear weapons, is now in breach of Article VI of the treaty:

Article VI

Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

In previous communication to other NPT states Britain has explicitly linked the number of nuclear warheads it has to its Article VI obligation. In a speech to the UN 2015 Review Conference of the NPT Baroness Anelay, Minister of State at the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office, said:

Madam President, the United Kingdom remains firmly committed to step-by-step disarmament, and our obligations under Article Six. We announced in January that we have reduced the number of warheads on each of our deployed ballistic missile submarines from 48 to 40, and the number of operational missiles on each of those submarines to no more than eight.

This takes our total number of operationally available warheads to no more than 120. And this will enable us to reduce our overall nuclear warhead stockpile to not more than 180 by the mid 2020s.

The UK has argued to be in compliance with its Article VI obligations because it was reducing the number of nuclear warheads. It thus can not claim to be in compliance with the treaty when it increases that number.

The just published Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy which introduces the British policy change argues on page 76 that the higher numbers are necessary:

The UK’s independent nuclear deterrent has existed for over 60 years to deter the most extreme threats to our national security and way of life, helping to guarantee our security and that of our Allies.
Some states are now significantly increasing and diversifying their nuclear arsenals. They are investing in novel nuclear technologies and developing new ‘warfighting’ nuclear systems which they are integrating into their military strategies and doctrines and into their political rhetoric to seek to coerce others. The increase in global competition, challenges to the international order, and proliferation of potentially disruptive technologies all pose a threat to strategic stability.
In 2010 the Government stated an intent to reduce our overall nuclear warhead stockpile ceiling from not more than 225 to not more than 180 by the mid-2020s. However, in recognition of the evolving security environment, including the developing range of technological and doctrinal threats, this is no longer possible, and the UK will move to an overall nuclear weapon stockpile of no more than 260 warheads

Technological threats against the British nukes are possible but what please are 'doctrinal threats'?

The UK has at all times one nuclear submarine with nuclear armed missiles at sea. That is its sole nuclear deterrence element that could be endangered by new technological threats, for example swarms of armed submersed drones. But putting more nuclear warheads onto that one submarine at sea will not make that submarine more safe or change the technological threat level. It is the wrong solution to a potentially upcoming problem.

This 'ambiguity' is also bad:

While our resolve and capability to do so if necessary is beyond doubt, we will remain deliberately ambiguous about precisely when, how and at what scale we would contemplate the use of nuclear weapons. Given the changing security and technological environment, we will extend this long-standing policy of deliberate ambiguity and no longer give public figures for our operational stockpile, deployed warhead or deployed missile numbers.

The hiding of such numbers can lead to miscalculations on the opponent's side and is as such a destabilizing element. It does not increase national security but potentially endangers it.

The UK is intentionally breaching the Non-Proliferation Treaty and increasing its nuclear stockpile. It is also the UK which is following illegal U.S. sanctions on Iran despite their incompatibility with the JCPOA.

Why then should Iran, or any other country, be expected to stay within the negotiated framework of the NPT and JCPOA?

Posted by b on March 16, 2021 at 14:11 UTC | Permalink


The nuclearisation of western states is part of their desperation as their conventional military forces are getting weaker and even the likes of Iran can deliver a serious punishment to any aggression by western supremacists.

The UK was one of the hardest hit countries by the Pandemic. -10 % drop. It was forced to cut the army to 70k. US budgets, meanwhile, stipulate incoming cuts in the military budget as the US debt is becoming too big.

Conventional weakness must be compensated by nuclearisation. Both in the US and in the UK. It will happen in France too.

These rabid dogs, desperate to rule the world, as they remember that their ancestors did, are going crazy because of their decline, and only have the way of nuclear bullying ahead.

The only thing that this could cause is an implosion of the NPT regime, and everybody getting nukes, since the world you are looking at is about rising non-western countries combined with rising nuclear militarisation by a desperate West snarling at the rest of the world.

Posted by: Passer by | Mar 16 2021 14:32 utc | 1

Very wise move by HMG. Would it come to pass that (a) Scotland will recede (b) northern English shire will rebel, how to defend London from the northern hordes? More nukes may save the day, and the southern England, without resorting to expensive manpower etc.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 16 2021 14:43 utc | 2

@ b who wrote
Technological threats against the British nukes are possible but what please are 'doctrinal threats'?


The doctrine of privately owned global private finance is being threatened and its not spoken of directly in polite company. So many continue to suffer/die and they don't know what for. Will the unspoken ever be told?

The shit show continues until it doesn't

Posted by: psychohistorian | Mar 16 2021 14:48 utc | 3

This is the logical conclusion to Brexit. Surprise would be if the UK didn't increase its military resources and aggressiveness (not only in the conventional sphere, but also in the psychological/propaganda one).

There's no vacuum in politics. Once the EU is gone, something had to fill its void in the British geopolitical doctrine.

Let's not forget that the UK's main target is not Iran or Russia, but China (as expected):

China is major threat, but UK will keep up trade links, says defence review: Cold war with Beijing not feasible, says Raab, though it is seen as foremost state-based threat to Britain

Today's main conflict is between capitalism and (a still infant) socialism. This vindicates the Marxist line of thought that History is mainly the saga of class struggle, not religious, cultural or racial struggle.

The Second Cold War has begun.

Posted by: vk | Mar 16 2021 15:06 utc | 4

I'd suggest that such moves may be just "controlled" leaks previous to budget cuts in conventional military spending and/or military personnel perks and support system. The effects of Brexit and COVID would probably need several cuts in social services in order ot keep the "Singapore on Thames" illusion alive.

There is no reasonable argument to support the increase from 180 to 260 nuclear weapons in order to keep China on check. Britain cannot face alone Russia, and China spends much more money, more wisely.

It may also be a way to boost the British defense sector, since the announce also included research on biological weapons, quantum technology, high-speed misiles, etc.

Posted by: Andres | Mar 16 2021 15:27 utc | 5

This is a great story, thanks b.
1. Iran obviously figured all this out before the Brits put in writing. Sleazy is as sleazy does?
2. It's been increasingly obvious, since WWII, that Christian Colonial Capitalism is believed by its beneficiaries to be worth mass-murdering and lying for. 2022 could be the year when we find out if it was worth dying for...

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 16 2021 15:33 utc | 6

Money makes the world go round and will be the death of us all. Recently some scientists posited that the reason we don't find intelligent life in the universe is because once a species/civilization gains a certain level of 'intelligence' it self-immolates and goes extinct. It's easy to see how this might be true based upon the trajectory of our 'intelligence.'

Posted by: gottlieb | Mar 16 2021 15:40 utc | 7

@ vk

This is gonna be one weird Cold War, where people openly shout at each other but also openly trade billions worth of goods and shaking hands.

Posted by: Smith | Mar 16 2021 15:42 utc | 8

@ Posted by: Smith | Mar 16 2021 15:42 utc | 8

There was trade with the Soviet Union during the First Cold War.

Posted by: vk | Mar 16 2021 15:47 utc | 9

@ vk

There was also the Iron Curtains and the USSR/the 2nd World faced massive sanctions.

It's not like this one where the 1st world wants to war on China but still depend on China's manufacturing.

Posted by: Smith | Mar 16 2021 15:51 utc | 10

I'm not sure if this qualifies as a breach of the NPT. After all Article VI states such silly things like "negotiations", "effective measures" and "treaty". I'm not aware the other recognized nuclear powers - including Russia and China - have ever offered something like that to the UK.

On a practical level: That's really so typical Johnson. Just let him play "British Empire" and try not to laugh. A few nukes more won't improve the UK's international standing, they will just create additional costs, both in funds and in goodwill. In particular the British long term financial prospects don't look to rosy anyway.

Posted by: m | Mar 16 2021 16:43 utc | 11

Outlaws and Outlaw Nations break laws, promises and treaties, so we shouldn't at all be surprised since the UK was the first globe-girdling Outlaw Empire--Sorry Spain, but you never really got to that point. With ongoing depletion of North Sea oil & gas, a better use of UK's Nukes would be to turn them into reactor fuel and thus bolster energy security. But no, better to feed the Parasites instead.

Posted by: karlof1 | Mar 16 2021 17:06 utc | 12

Trump at least was honest, he said "I'm leaving these treaties" - and left.
The UK is trying to do the same discretely, leaving a treaty but asking the other signatories to continue to follow it. Thus giving them a theoretical advantage.
(JCPOA is only obligatory on Iran in some minds)

"Ambiguous" is as Israel does with it's own nukes. This "allows" nuclear warheads to be sent anywhere without any disclosure. So now Johnson and his sidekick Starmer want to send some "ambiguous" nukes to a tax-haven in the Caribbean (to threaten Cuba or Venezuela), or to some other ex-colonial territory such as Belize? Who would know? Not the people of Belize, as they would not have any access to UK bases. (Same system as used by the US in Poland.)

(Belize is used as a training base for the UK).

Posted by: Stonebird | Mar 16 2021 17:11 utc | 13

Posted by: vk | Mar 16 2021 15:06 utc | 4

"Today's main conflict is between capitalism and (a still infant) socialism. This vindicates the Marxist line of thought that History is mainly the saga of class struggle, not religious, cultural or racial struggle."

The primary conflict between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union was based on Nazis ethnic, religious, racial and genocidal beliefs and theories. Secondarily it was capitalist fascism vs. communism. The Cold War was mainly ideological. The current conflict between NATO vs. Russia has reverted to an ethnic and racial conflict instigated by the Western powers. Looking at the current economic systems Russia is like the West running a corrupted based capitalism. Where are the ideological differences? Russia unlike the Soviet Union is not offering some radical alternative system as happened in WWII and the first Cold War.

And this is why I believe that a war between NATO/EU and Russia is more likely than not. The rhetoric of the West almost matches word for word Nazi attacks on Jewish/Bolshevik conspiracies. In America blatantly racist tropes are used against the Russians. Anything and everything Russian is by definition nefarious and evil and racist based.

And now those same racial hatreds are being directed at the Chinese.

(BTW has anybody noticed that 1st minister Stoltenberg resembles Goebbels.)

Posted by: Erelis | Mar 16 2021 17:14 utc | 14

home based test for the virus very interesting

Posted by: snake | Mar 16 2021 17:28 utc | 15

@Erelis | Mar 16 2021 17:14 utc | 14

(BTW has anybody noticed that 1st minister Stoltenberg resembles Goebbels.)

Posted by: Norwegian | Mar 16 2021 17:28 utc | 16

"Secondarily it was capitalist fascism vs. communism."
You're wrong. The Germans added layers of makeup to a regime that they regarded as an enemy to their class structure. Do you really think that the Junkers and big capital gave a crap about the ethnic themes? They wanted the threat to their class position removed. That was what led to the formulation of a war drive that began as soon as Hitler became chancellor, or rather 'officially' began then.

Posted by: dadooronron | Mar 16 2021 17:38 utc | 17

dadooronron @17 <-- This poster is correct. No two forms of fascism are ever the same. Each particular instance of fascism is custom tailored by the business elites with whichever identity features (religion, ethnicity, national mythology, sexuality, etc) are necessary to recruit one portion of the working class to attack another portion of the working class.

Posted by: William Gruff | Mar 16 2021 18:14 utc | 18

Erelis is wrong on all accounts.

The Cold War as ideological? That's idealist nonsense and no capitalist would agree. It was an inter-systemic and hence material conflict between rival social systems, representing different social classes. Ideology was only one part of the material conflict.

Likewise, Nazism wasn't just a free floating ideology, and Operation Barbarossa and the invasion of the Soviet Union had underlying economic motives, as Adam Tooze so clearly reveals in his award winning book, Wages of Destruction. Fascist ideology had a material basis in the class struggles and contradictions of capitalism in the real historical social formations of the time.

Posted by: Prof | Mar 16 2021 18:22 utc | 19

Fascists had some technological fetishes like "running trains on time". USA in general, and NYC subway in particular is resolutely anti-fascist.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 16 2021 18:52 utc | 20

Do not believe the hype, we will leave union then deal with snp. We began with an atom bomb.

Posted by: scotsxile | Mar 16 2021 18:58 utc | 21

As might be expected, Iran's Zarif's retort at the UK's action was rather predictable and further reinforces the fact that--with the exception of New Zealand--none of the English speaking governments are honest or law-abiding.

Posted by: karlof1 | Mar 16 2021 18:59 utc | 22

@ karlof1 | Mar 16 2021 18:59 utc | 22 with the Iran link, thanks and who wrote
none of the English speaking governments are honest or law-abiding.

Those barbarians may not believe in being law-abiding but they do believe in rules based-abiding as long as they make the global private finance, etc.

If this continues it will further sharpen the axis alignment of countries around the world and we will get to see just how tight the Commonwealth is.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Mar 16 2021 19:28 utc | 23

piotr bitman @ 20: ZING! if only adherence to the train schedule were not just one among other measures of fascism, but zing nonetheless.

are british troops being allowed to opt out of the corona virus vaccine? numerous sources have reported that up to 1/3 of US troops are refusing the vaccine. troop readiness, indeed. were the troops allowed to opt out of taking Cipro when invading Iraq in 2003? i don't think so. or maybe the threat of Saddam's non-existent wmd's was greater than the threat of the real corona virus?

the state is at war with itself, but who could imagine an empire allowing half of its future fighting force to become diabetic and morbidly obese? techno-fetishism is symptomatic of internal division and conflict, above all in the US.

does the US, or its sycophantic poodles, really have anything militarily that they can threaten Iran with, beyond nukes? stuxnet, decades of sanctions, manufactured insurgencies like MKE, etc., millions lost in wars drummed up by the West, as in Iraq, etc., who knows what else, and the Iranian state doesn't appear about to collapse. so what else can the Anglo-Americans do but nuke them?

Posted by: jason | Mar 16 2021 19:41 utc | 24

This has nothing to do with Russia / China / Iran and everything to do with the growing realization that our real enemy is the EU

Posted by: Merandor | Mar 16 2021 19:45 utc | 25

It's not like this one where the 1st world wants to war on China but still depend on China's manufacturing.

Posted by: Smith | Mar 16 2021 15:51 utc | 10

Well in the first Cold War the US wants war on the Soviets but still depended on soviet titanium to build spy planes, for example.

Posted by: A.L. | Mar 16 2021 19:46 utc | 26

Zarif said

In utter hypocrisy, @BorisJohnson is “concerned about Iran developing a viable nuclear weapon”. On the very same day he announces his country will increase its stockpile of nukes. Unlike the UK and allies, Iran believes nukes and all WMDs are barbaric & must be eradicated.   1:09 AM · Mar 17, 2021·Twitter Web App

Posted by: arata | Mar 16 2021 20:00 utc | 27

I suspect that the U.K. and it’s handler, the U.S. have realized that all the latest Russian systems exist, are in service and are as devastating as claimed.

The only thing the U.K. can do is increase the number of warheads as they cannot easily in the short to mid term increase the number of delivery systems.

Just a sop to NATO to show the U.K. is acting tough.

I wonder if Bojo is aware that just one of the latest Russian RS-28 Sarmat missiles can effectively knock out the U.K?

Posted by: Beibdnn | Mar 16 2021 20:02 utc | 28

Posted by: Merandor | Mar 16 2021 19:45 utc | 25

LOL. Is "our" US or UK?

Posted by: Laguerre | Mar 16 2021 20:03 utc | 29

By the way, as someone pointed out today, once Scotland is independent, there will be nowhere to put this new abundance of nukes, other than in heavily populated areas like Portsmouth. Wales may go independent too, if UK begins to break up. So people will get nukes in their backyards.

Posted by: Laguerre | Mar 16 2021 20:08 utc | 30

Actually new warmongering may not be the point. The Johnson regime is notoriously corrupt, and the point may be to put large juicy contracts, unexamined for competitivity, in the pockets of their friends. Somewhat like the MIC, but don't expect any product at all. More like the US rebuilding Iraq after 2003. This Tory regime have form now. There was the cross-Channel ferry contract that was given to a company that had no ferries, had never had any, nor had a plan to lease any, had no experience of ferry operation, had not arranged with the Belgians for berthing at a port there, and the port of Ramsgate (I think it was) was not big enough without considerable expansion. But they got the contract anyway.

And then there was the 22 bn spent on the track-and-trace operation last spring for COVID. The wife of a Tory MP got appointed, and nobody knows where all that money went, as virtually nothing happened. Normal contract safeguards were overridden as it was an emergency.

I was much reminded of the story of the disappearance of 18 bn of Iraqi cash that was spent by the US occupation authorities without accounting in 2003-4.

Posted by: Laguerre | Mar 16 2021 20:29 utc | 31

I am ashamed to be British. Well, even more so now...

My son told me earlier that the UK is expecting some sort of attack (false flag?) by 2030.

Boris is saying we will be "Match fit"...

The only question I need an answer to is can I buy factor 5,000,000 sun block?

It's obvious that the British establishment cheated the last election to stop Corbyn. I'm sat here pondering how much different the world could be if he hadn't be tucked up...

Posted by: Some Random Passerby | Mar 16 2021 20:39 utc | 32

wikipedia: On May 14, 1961, the world's first nuclear ramjet engine, Tory-IIA, mounted on a railroad car, roared to life for a few seconds. Three years later, Tory-IIC was run for five minutes at full power. Despite these and other successful tests, the Pentagon, sponsor of the "Pluto project", had second thoughts. The weapon was considered "too provocative",[5] and it was believed that it would compel the Soviets to construct a similar device, against which there was no known defense. Intercontinental ballistic missile technology had proven to be more easily developed than previously thought, reducing the need for such highly capable cruise missiles. On July 1, 1964, seven years and six months after it was started, "Project Pluto" was canceled

Will they cancel Tory-VIIIF?

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 16 2021 20:51 utc | 33

I have heard that UK can not make nuk missile, but uncle sam makes for her, It Is a good businuess for uncle.

Posted by: Arata | Mar 16 2021 22:09 utc | 34


Unlike Zarif, I think it is not utter hypocrisy, but it is an utter arogance, Bojo aimed to show his deliberate arrogance. That is western diplomacy logic, he intended to say, we can.

Posted by: Arata | Mar 16 2021 22:18 utc | 35

“By the way, as someone pointed out today, once Scotland is independent, there will be nowhere to put this new abundance of nukes, other than in heavily populated areas like Portsmouth. Wales may go independent too, if UK begins to break up. So people will get nukes in their backyards.”

The UK Nuclear Deterrent is already in a “backyard” .... ask the inhabitants of Clydeside & the greater Glasgow area. It’s somewhat more populated than the River Tamar area.

It does not matter where the UK Nuclear Deterrent is geographically placed in the British Isles ... a densely populated area is not far away. Nor is any of the critical maintenance infrastructure.

Posted by: Per Terram | Mar 16 2021 22:36 utc | 36

Sewing seeds of division
in this psychotic prison
we have built the walls
that wound our empty souls
that keep us in the dark
digging deeper in the hole.
Sewing seeds of fear
as they push the ending near
Selling death and war
prostitues that whore
all the weapons you will need
to make the children bleed.
Planting distractions
Inciting reactions
Diverting attention
from your murderous intention.
Let us fight amongst ourselves
who would cross the great divide
to listen to the enemy
on the ‘other’ side.
Everybody knows
that money rules the show
We think we have control
but we choose the status quo
now we harvest what we sew.
It’s insane and we’re to blame
which only proves the more we know
the more we stay the same.

Posted by: ld | Mar 16 2021 22:36 utc | 37

Laguerre @ 30 and 31:

I'm sure London has plenty of missile launch sites already in people's backyards in and around the capital so upgrading them for launching nuclear weapons should be a cinch. Though they might have degraded somewhat after 2012.

"... There was the cross-Channel ferry contract that was given to a company that had no ferries, had never had any, nor had a plan to lease any, had no experience of ferry operation, had not arranged with the Belgians for berthing at a port there, and the port of Ramsgate (I think it was) was not big enough without considerable expansion. But they got the contract anyway ..."

Sounds very much like the kind of company that the West's anointed anti-Putin Messiah Alexei Navalny might run ... he and his brother Oleg had a contract with Yves Rocher to do deliveries of the French company's goods ... so the brothers contracted the work out to a cheaper company and kept the profits for themselves and their family. No wonder Western governments love Navalny so much!

Posted by: Jen | Mar 16 2021 22:41 utc | 38

thanks b... it is so sad to see the lower side of humanity on display, grabbing a security blanket called nukes, what because the usa says all the nato countries have to spend more on the military?? personally i think after watching that documentary on the city of london - that is the convoluted mess that @psychohistorian keeps trying to address... it is all over finances and keeping hold on power and not letting anyone else have it... forget about sharing or christianity or any of this... completely drop it and go for more nukes and preparations for war... yeah.. that is the ticket.... jesus, but it is so embarrassing to be a member of the human race at this moment in time given our politicians and so called non leader, leaders - in business and everywhere else... they are all completely vacuous and lack any strength of character to stand apart from the madness... no.. they can only fit into the same...

but if nothing else, it is nice to see the hypocrisy on such open display... i am sure iran has known about this, but since non of the western countries have any sense of shame or embarrassment - it all continues on as if normal... it isn't... we're screwed unless some aliens come down from another planet and help us out here... our leadership on the world stage today, especially in the west is completely incapable of it..

Posted by: james | Mar 16 2021 23:51 utc | 39

Off topic, but a highly relevant interview with VJ Preshad on Democracy Now about The REAL problems between the U$A and it's new cold war with China.
This should be aired in the US MSM, but of course it isn't..

The bald truth on PBS, refreshing..

Posted by: vetinLA | Mar 17 2021 1:36 utc | 40

Yo, the council of Rome rears its ugly head.
EU is the antichrist

Posted by: Dogon Priest | Mar 17 2021 2:17 utc | 41

Americans and British assume that only select nations can legally build and stockpile nuclear weapons. Corporate media and the US Government constantly warn of grave danger if nations like Iran illegally develop nuclear weapons. They cite the 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the NPT. This is an international treaty to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to achieve worldwide nuclear disarmament. This treaty means that Iran and the United States should not have nuclear weapons. Nearly every nation in the world signed the NPT because it promised to eliminate nuclear weapons worldwide. The core purpose of the NPT is to eliminate nuclear arms, not to perpetuate the nuclear monopoly of a few countries.

I produced a short video about this.

After a few months it was age-restricted by Youtube so one must log on to view it and most will not. I think because it mentions Israel's nuclear weapons, and that the USA started Iran's nuclear program. Iran might follow North Korea's example and withdraw from the NPT to end this silly game, even if it doesn't plan to build any nukes.

Posted by: Carlton Meyer | Mar 17 2021 3:17 utc | 42

Because of this violation of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, it's time for massive economic sanctions and intrusive weapons inspections be placed on the British rogue state and its WMD program.

And Madeline Albright can be dragged out of her mummy sarcophagus to pronounce on the death of hundreds of thousands of British children by these sanctions: "We think the price is worth it."

After all, the United Kingdom has the honor of being second only to America as the World's Greatest War Criminal Nation.

Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria--all nations that the United Killer Kingdom has bombed or invaded the past generation.

Yet, the British pathetically prattle on about their military "defending democracy" or some such tripe.

The British are just as delusional as the Americans in this regard.

It appears that many people in the United Killers have a nostalgia for the "good old days" of the British Empire when it could attack the Wogs, Sand N!ggers, Darkies, Hajis, or Chinks with impunity.

Sadly, reality will drop on their head like a ton of bricks when these Wogs, Sand N!ggers, Darkies, Hajis, or Chinks give the United Kingdom a much deserved taste of its own medicine.

Posted by: ak74 | Mar 17 2021 5:19 utc | 43

ak74 @ 43 says" The UK has the honor of being second only to America as the World's Greatest War Criminal Nation.

Why in one case you named the government and in the other you named the people, instead of the government. The ordinary British and American people[the governed] do not have a clue, governments often conduct their foreign affairs in secret because the interest sought by the governments are often not the interest of the ordinary people and the private media [MSM] will often support the private interest by redirecting the minds of the governed to other thoughts or will blame or promote an element in the decoy.

Mostly governments act to do the bidding of the private Oligarch and his or her ventures in foreign lands. I suggest you name the oligarch and identify his or her private oligarch interest to the acts of the governments that you blame. Basically, it is easy to fall prey to the profit hunter, because the decoy (the nation state political system) takes the heat while the oligarch remains safe and hidden. The people of the world are divided and conquered by the nation state system; it sorts 8 billion people into membership (citizenship) in one of the ~256 nation states (cells). The private interest of each cell tailor the political system of that cell, to serve as a decoy, designed to hide and protect the private interest the political system serves.

Posted by: snake | Mar 17 2021 7:14 utc | 44

vetinLA | Mar 17 2021 1:36 utc | 40:

Thanks for the link. I'm not expecting much with the upcoming Alaska meeting to be honest especially if "Mr. Blinken is very, very, very much like Mike Pompeo" as Vijay Prashad stated.

Posted by: Ian2 | Mar 17 2021 7:35 utc | 45

Sounds very much like the kind of company that the West's anointed anti-Putin Messiah Alexei Navalny might run

Posted by: Jen | Mar 16 2021 22:41 utc | 38

The question you should asking is how is that a Western democracy can be run like a Russian mafia (Yes, I know that the Tories have plenty of friends among the Russian oligarchs, indeed are funded by them these days, London being the preferred landing zone).

Posted by: Laguerre | Mar 17 2021 8:01 utc | 46

to add support to what I said in 44 aboveread this quote
"Virtually the entire program has been directed by Bill Gates. He was the man who came up with the idea of lock downs (quarantining the healthy), which is something that no one had ever thought of before. And he is, as we all know, the main force behind the vaccine. Recently, he’s begun simply making public statements directing society, the implication being that he is now dictating directly to the people how they are supposed to behave, and what kind of new society will emerge from this fake corona virus crisis that he himself manufactured."

Please remember, I am only the messenger.. forwarding someone else's stuff.

Posted by: snake | Mar 17 2021 8:45 utc | 47

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 16 2021 14:43 utc | 2

But Piotr, as I understand it the British nukes are housed in Scotland. Just how would that work? (By the way I think you mean "secede" and not "recede".)

Posted by: Gene Poole | Mar 17 2021 11:39 utc | 48

Arata 34

I think you touched on the key factor. The UK defence establishment knows that it doesn't need more warheads. This is almost certainly part of the US/UK negotiations on aspects of the renewal of the UK's fleet of ballistic missile submarines and their Trident missiles/warheads. I suspect that this is all about the UK trying to get a better deal.

“I think it’s wonderful that the U.K. is working on a new warhead at the same time, and I think we will have discussions and be able to share technologies,” Alan Shaffer, the Pentagon’s deputy under secretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, said in a question and answer session Thursday at the annual Nuclear Deterrence Summit, hosted in Alexandria, Va., by Defense Daily affiliate publication, ExchangeMonitor.

Shaffer said W93 and its British counterpart “will be two independent, development systems.”

The United Kingdom has a purely sea-based nuclear arsenal, comprising nuclear-powered, ballistic-missile submarines. The entire U.K. nuclear-weapons program closely mirrors the sea-based leg of the U.S. arsenal, including the Lockheed Martin-built [LMT] Trident missiles carried by both countries’ boats.

Quote from 11th Feb

Posted by: JohninMK | Mar 17 2021 11:42 utc | 49

our real enemy is the EU

Posted by: Merandor | Mar 16 2021 19:45 utc | 25

Perhaps; but who are "we"?

Posted by: Gene Poole | Mar 17 2021 11:49 utc | 50

Gene Poole 48

Part of the Scottish independence case is that they want to be nuke free. As such, probably after an expensive lease notice period both Faslane naval base and the nearby Coalport storage depot will have to be emptied.

Relocating the submarines to an English south coast base would be relatively easy but operationally bad. Relocating the Trident missile storage may mean moving them to the US, where they already spend some of their life. Making it clear to more than the few who understand now that the UK deterrent is not actually 'independent'.

This is one of the two or three big reasons that Westminster is completely desperate that Scotland does not break away. Hence much bluster currently from Boris.

Posted by: JohninMK | Mar 17 2021 11:54 utc | 51

I've always suspected that the Brits don't even have the arming and launch codes for their Trident nukes.

Posted by: William Gruff | Mar 17 2021 12:31 utc | 52

William Gruff 52

Its all classified of course but we may have the arming codes for the warheads as they are ours (or maybe not as the U.K.’s Trident Holbrook nuclear warhead is “thought to be” a modified, U.S.designed, W76 warhead) but maybe not the launch codes for the missiles, leased from the US as I understand it.

Posted by: JohninMK | Mar 17 2021 13:12 utc | 53

The non-compliance with NPT is deeper than the UK policy change. see FAS dot Org "Aging Electronics May Limit Nuke Reliability" (@secrecy news)

Posted by: Walter | Mar 17 2021 13:19 utc | 54

Walter 54

Agreed and the UK MoD has said for a while that the warheads had a 'use safely by' date. They could have just replaced them on a one for one basis. Maybe they got a 'buy one get one free' deal from the US.

Posted by: JohninMK | Mar 17 2021 13:54 utc | 55

I know I shouldn't joke about Mutually Assured Destruction but I found this pic of 9 different orbital-grade+ rockets from Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, ranging in length from 190' to 400'.
And these are just the Big ones.
I'm posting it as The Sacrificial Lamb's Guide to Nuke ICBM-spotting.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 17 2021 14:32 utc | 56

@ A.L

Yeah, sure, spy planes, but the amount of trade between USA and China involve basic stuff like medicine, toilet paper and household appliances, so if China cuts off USA, USA wouldn't have even enough toilet paper to wipe themselves with.

Posted by: Smith | Mar 18 2021 0:49 utc | 57

In a world where nuclear supremacy and full spectrum dominance were not a pipe dream, I could understand the arms race and the build up in the west in hopes to achieve it. I was horrified by it, but understood the logic.

But today, it makes no sense.

More weapons will not overcome the deterrence that countries like Russia have created. There is zero hope that the west can achieve first strike capability by building more missiles. They are simply doing two things here: throwing money into a pit and increasing the odds of accidents.

Posted by: Don Harder | Mar 18 2021 7:26 utc | 58

We've got orders to contain China. Send the carriers to the South Chinese Sea immediately. This game needs to be changed!

Sir, the carriers are not ready.

What do you mean, they cost 10 billion?

Sir, one of them is leaking that bad we daren't put it in water and besides they haven't got any aircraft. Even the Americans are now saying the f35 is a turkey, and that's being polite. They're back to making 40 year old f15s and 16s - it's that bad. None of the pilots want to fly the f35 anyway, scared of birdstrikes.

Well if that the case get some f15s then, otherwise we'll look like idiots sailing our carriers to China with no fecking planes.

Sir, we can't do that.

Dammit, that 6 billion we had earmarked to fix the toilets in the NHS, I want that spent on planes for our carriers!

Sir they won't be able to take off - we didn't put catapults in the carriers. All they can fly is the f35.


Sir Yes sir.

You mean they're useless? How can we fix them?

Sir we'll have to build new carriers, but our budget is all blown on our commitment to the f35. We promised the Americans we'd pay for the f35 since hardly anyone else wants them. Even the Japanese are getting cold feet.

Papers everywhere in a rage.

How the hell are we going to contain China then Einstein! What other weapons have we got, we can't exactly have a game plan to use our carriers as rammers, that's ridiculous!

Sir yes sir!

So what can we do to contain China then?

Shrugs shoulders - sir, more nukes?

Jesus christ!  Haven't you forgot what happened when we last test fired one and it went the wrong way!  If that thing was armed we'd have nuked LA!

Sir, yes sir, no one knows how these things work anymore as top priority has been multigender bathrooms and emotional support rooms with all the support animals onboard last 10 years.

This is not helping!  How are we going to contain China!

Sir, how about we use that 6 billion toilet fund and run an ad campaign in all all our presses and just say that's what we're doing. No one will ever know.

Game-changer - plan approved!

Posted by: Migao | Mar 18 2021 11:20 utc | 59

It's all about blowing your money in the wind. People could get too curious and too powerful, if they had enough money.

Posted by: Mina | Mar 18 2021 11:32 utc | 60

Contact your member of Congress/Senators and ask them to hold hearings on the US help for Britain's nuclear weapons activities.

Thank you.

Posted by: Tony | Apr 6 2021 10:06 utc | 61

The comments to this entry are closed.