EU Nuclear Deterrent

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by badal, Jul 24, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. With the horrors of the 20th century two world wars behind us, I doubt if the 27 countries within the EU will go to war with one another in the near future. However regards a nuclear deterrent the The European Union have little or no interest for the present. France was willing to make its nuclear deterrent part of a European Union defence system back in 1995 if that was wanted in the future, but what about the UK? Have the UK government ever thought of asking the EU to pay for the Trident Nuclear Deterrent?

    Surely UK and French taxpayers should not be expected to pay the bill for a future 27 state European Union nuclear deterrent defence system?

    Some interesting facts enclosed:

    Assembly Fact Sheet No. 2 European security policy, collective defence and nuclear deterrence

    'In the section of the 1994 Assembly report on “The role and future of nuclear weapons” 1 , entitled “Towards a European nuclear deterrent”, the Rapporteur already hazards the view that Europe, probably “reluctant to jeopardise a minimal consensus achieved only with difficulty, […] seems to have little interest in the matter for the present”. . However, in the draft recommendation to the report, the Assembly noted “that it would betotally illogical to start the implementation of a European common foreign and security policy (CFSP) […]without closely examining the role of the French and British nuclear forces”

    Nuclear Deterrent Cooperation Involving Britain, France, and Germany

    Paris: Friday, 1 September 1995

    'Hours before French nuclear testing was due to start in the Pacific, President Jacques Chirac said yesterday that France would be willing to make its nuclear deterrent part of a European Union defence system if that was wanted in the future.'

    Re-think urged on UK nuclear deterrent: Tuesday, 30 June 2009

    ‘The Government was today facing renewed pressure to re-think its decision to update its Trident nuclear deterrent in the face of growing cost pressures on the defence budget’.
  2. The only way I want to see our nuclear deterrent in the EU is as Multiple Re-entry Vehicle Airbursts.
  3. Not one single aspect of the defence of the UK should be reliant on any other nation.
    Be it Trident or anything else.
    All this wonderful friendship with european states is a pretty new thing and probably not permanent. Lets face facts, half of europe likes us even less than we like them.
  4. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    Hmm, more EU nonsense - and how can you tell?. Well, what word is sigularly missing here? That's right, NATO.

    NATO nuclear weapons have been in Europe for almost 50 years (or thereabouts) and give the ability for many countries (including NL, BE, GR, TU, IT, GER, etc) to drop nuclear weapons on the bad guys (i.e. the Russians). It's worked fine - the Yanks build, own and control the bombs, and if necessary they will be dropped by those NATO members who have the planes, trained crews, etc, to do so. They will never be used, but that's not the point really.........

    There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for a trading organisation such as the EU to get involved in any aspect of Defence, let alone the uniquely political one of nuclear weapons. To do so reveals their pretty obvious aim to become a Nation State in itself, rather than a group of independent Nations.
  5. None of the eurotrash are getting our nukes. Ever.
  6. One major obstacle is that the other EU nations, by buying into an EU system, would promptly become nuclear weapon states, which might have some unfortunate implications for the NPT regime...

    (I'm just attempting to imagine how on earth release authority would be controlled - 'well, sir, we've had a message from the Taoiseach. He says he's sorry to be the last chap to grant release authority, but his lawyers are wrestling over the implications for Irish neutrality...)
  7. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    Shall we, post-Lisbon, be allowed an independent foreign policy and independent defence?
  8. No! Most certainly not!
  9. Seconded.
  10. OS, Mate, the EU is no longer a trading organisation. It is a fully fledged nation of nations and it doesnt matter what we the electorate think or want. If it did, we would have had a refrerendum on the subject as promised by the current goverment. However, they lied.
  11. Which half Jag?, The Central to Eastern Europeans like the UK by and large, the Germans don't hate you, the Scandinavians don't, the Med don't (the Spanish Gibralter thing is not htat important to Spaniards by and large, a politician talks it up the UK papers pick up on it, story, you ask the locals they don't care either way.), the French have this weird grudging respect for the UK, a love/hate thing but there are so many Brits there now it's broken down the barriers, hell there is a small town that has an Englishman for a mayor, he's been elected twice. Any UK towns have a Frog as mayor?
    Ireland, we have over 800 years of history between us, lot's of it unpleasent, we don't hate you either, history is history, it happened you learn from it and try to do better.

    I've noticed this aweful trend in the UK towards a fatalistic "oh everythngs shi,t and no one likes us" way of looking at things, the only people who dislike you are the crap places where people living in the stone age hang out. evreyone else thinks you alright.

    cheer up. :D
  12. Capital E on Eurotrash please, no need for that sort of thing. :wink: