Keeping the blogosphere posted on the goings on of the world of submarines since late 2004... and mocking and belittling general foolishness wherever it may be found. Idaho's first and foremost submarine blog. (If you don't like something on this blog, please E-mail me; don't call me at home.)

Saturday, January 17, 2009

The Goal Of Our Founding Fathers Soon To Become A Reality

No, it's not the election of a black man to the Presidency, it's something deeper and more visceral than that. Finally, we're going to be able to fulfill the dream our Founding Fathers cherished the most, but never believed would come true. First, some background...

Check out this story from Britain about retired "Defence" chiefs who favor giving up the UK's independent nuclear deterrent:
Three retired senior military chiefs made an unlikely appeal Friday for Britain to scrap its 20 billion-pound ($30 billion) nuclear missile program, claiming it is unnecessary and no longer independent of the United States.
Field Marshal Dwin Bramall, a former head of Britain's armed forces, and two colleagues wrote in a letter to The Times of London newspaper published Friday that the Trident nuclear submarine system is an expensive Cold War tool that no longer serves a strategic military purpose.
"Nuclear weapons have shown themselves to be completely useless as a deterrent to the threats and scale of violence we currently face or are likely to face, particularly international terrorism," the men wrote in their letter...
...Lockheed Martin Corp., the largest defense contractor in the U.S., and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., based in Pasadena, California, own two thirds of AWE Management Ltd. — which makes and maintains warheads for Britain's nuclear missiles.
"It is unthinkable that, because of the catastrophic consequences for guilty and innocent alike, these weapons would ever be launched, or seriously threatened, without the backing and support of the United States," the ex-military officials wrote in their letter.
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament said that Bramall, Ramsbotham and Beach had brought into question the government's entire justification for replacing the nuclear fleet.
"This statement debunks the myth that nuclear weapons are necessary for our security. These generals are no pacifists — they are purely practical about Britain's needs and have concluded that we are better off without them," the campaign's director Kate Hudson said.
In 1776, our Founding Fathers declared independence from the British Empire, but always felt bad about leaving the people of Britain without the freedom we enjoyed. At the time, Great Britain was just too strong for us to liberate their people. Even through the beginning of WWII, we didn't have the military strength to free the people of the British Isles. By 1944, however, we basically occupied most of southwestern England, but Roosevelt (and later Truman) got cold feet when it came to fulfilling America's true Manifest Destiny. Now, however, we are so much stronger than Britain that the only thing that keeps us from carrying out our Founder's dream are the 4 Trident-armed submarines that the UK keeps in their arsenal. When they go away... all we'll need to do is send a penny postcard to 10 Downing Street, and the Empire of George III will be ours free at last.

Expect this to be the main plot of "National Treasure III: What's On Page 47?" when it comes out sometime in the 'Teens (the decade after the 'Naughties).

Update 1042 17 Jan: I just realized that when the Brits do give up their nuclear deterrent, we're going to have to move fast; the French have been the enemies of Britain a lot longer than we have. (Remember who killed St. Jean D'Arc.) The peace-loving French haven't been maintaining their force de'frappe for nothing...


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very tongue in cheek! Well done!

Here's a question: how do the readers feel about the "US/UK Special Relationship"? Let's face it:
we pay more money than they do on any of
the joint programs, such as TRIDENT.

Is that relationship still relevant? When we build SSBN (X), should we just part ways and go it alone?

1/17/2009 10:15 AM

Blogger Vigilis said...

re: US/UK "Special Relationship"

Good question, anonymous Chap.

Wikipedia currently says... 76% of Americans polled viewed the British as an "ally in the War on Terror" according to Rasmussen Reports.[20] According to Harris Interactive 74% of Americans view Great Britain as a "close ally in the war in Iraq", well ahead of next-ranked Canada at 48%.

A June 2006 poll by Populus for The Times[21] showed that the number of Britons agreeing that "it is important for Britain’s long-term security that we have a close and special relationship with America" had fallen to 58% (from 71% in April), and that 65% believed that "Britain’s future lies more with Europe than America." 44% agreed that "America is a force for good in the world." A later poll reported in The Guardian[22] during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict said that 63% of Britons felt that the United Kingdom is tied too closely to the United States. A 2008 poll by The Economist has shown that Britons' views differ considerably from Americans' views when asked about the topics of religion, values, and national interest. This is not surprising, given that Britain, as a European nation still has European cultural and social values. [23]
Personally, I view the entities as
invested in each others survival:

The United States is the largest source of Foreign Direct Investment to the UK economy, likewise the United Kingdom is the largest single investor in the US economy.[12]

Besides nuclear missile issues there has been much to recommend continuation of the Special Relationship including,but not limited to:
Shared military bases, Military cooperation, and Intelligence sharing.

1/17/2009 11:06 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, let's not pat us on the back so hard.

There is no special relationship with GB. Keep in mind that when WWI started a majority of the US wanted to enter the war on the German side against the British. It took Wilson the anglophile several years to massage the propaganda to get us involved in the war.

1/17/2009 1:05 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did the 1:05 anon comment above respond to any polls referenced by Vigilis?


1/17/2009 3:52 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like we are already locked in on jointly developing the next SSBN with the Brits - or at least the missile compartment, anyway:

1/17/2009 7:07 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was going to mention the intelligence "thingie" but Vigilis beat me to it. There are other more subtle shared interests (besides economy and beer importation) not for discussion here that bear on how UK/US continue relations. Don't screw themn up.

1/18/2009 6:25 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I concur, the common missile compartment, if scrubbed by the UK, would default to the US... which could put US system in jeopardy. *sigh* more ammo for a new administration's budget ax....

1/18/2009 10:06 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are other more subtle shared interests (besides economy and beer importation) not for discussion here that bear on how UK/US continue relations.

You mean...the nurses in Holy Loch?


1/18/2009 11:40 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Given the current problems Britain is experiencing with its reactionary Muslim population and their horride health care system (not to mention the ghastly dental work) do we really want them? I like the beer, but who needs the extra headaches.

1/19/2009 6:11 AM

Anonymous tablet pc said...

Goodness, there is a lot of worthwhile info above!

10/07/2011 1:02 AM


Post a Comment

<< Home