General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Genes Extras

Genes Reunited subscription bonuses

As a way of saying thank you to our subscribers, we have launched Genes Extras. You'll find exclusive competitions and discounts on family history magazines, days out and much more.

Take me to Genes Extras


  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Should the UK keep it's nuclear deterrent ?

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date


OneFootInTheGrave Report 4 Apr 2013 10:04

In view of the fact that the UK is a member of NATO and has the US and France as allies, my question is does the UK need it's own independent nuclear deterrent ?

The UK would be "foolish" to abandon Trident in the face of the potential threat of nuclear attack from North Korea and Iran, David Cameron has said.


Bobtanian Report 4 Apr 2013 11:02



Porkie_Pie Report 4 Apr 2013 11:05




lilybids Report 4 Apr 2013 11:06

Of course we should


Muffyxx Report 4 Apr 2013 11:18

Absolutely yes.


Merlin Report 4 Apr 2013 13:34

No Question ,Yes,


ChrisofWessex Report 4 Apr 2013 13:43

Too true


GinN Report 4 Apr 2013 13:49

While there are any other countries holding it, it's got to be - definitely, yes!


InspectorGreenPen Report 4 Apr 2013 14:01



OneFootInTheGrave Report 4 Apr 2013 14:11

I agree with the need for a nuclear deterrent so I am not advocating that there should not be one, just questioning whether a shared nuclear deterrent would not provide adequate protection, and if not why not.

Gordon Brown rejected sharing with France, however in the latter part of 2010 this idea raised it's head again when David David Cameron discussed the issue during talks with Nicolas Sarkozy.


Julia Report 4 Apr 2013 14:17

Yes, we should keep our own, for the very obvious reasons.

Also, it would put my best friend's son out of work.

Julia in Derbyshire


GeordiePride Report 4 Apr 2013 15:54

We must always be prepared for the worst and defend ourselves accordingly.
Therefore the answer has got to be yes.



Porkie_Pie Report 4 Apr 2013 16:07

The obvious problem with a shared deterrent is being able to relie on another country to support what may not be a shared cause or view



Tecwyn Report 4 Apr 2013 16:09

This country should always maintain its own nuclear deterrent independently. We should never have to rely on America, and certainly not France, for protection from any aggressor.


Budgie Rustler

Budgie Rustler Report 4 Apr 2013 16:22

101% YES... and with even MORE improvements to our military defense system.

I want more and more protection for our children and their children's children etc,


BrianW Report 4 Apr 2013 17:39

Just imagine a rogue State wanted to sling a missile our way.
We would need the permission of (say) France to sling one back or to ask them to do it for us.
The purpose of deterence is to let a potential aggressor know that we can sling one back ourselves and therefore put them off the idea before it happens.
There are some pretty silly people out there with or developing their own toys: it's not the time to drop our guard.
The danger is greater than at any time since the Cuban stand-off during the Cold War.
A nuclear free World is a great aim but not until civilisation has spread all over.