So are you neutral and non-biased?
-
-
Als antwoord op @KevinPascoe @CNDuk
Unfortunately not, but read the article - it backs up my claim, the parts it mentions are all in missile. It also correctly refers to agreements before throwing that credibility away with a ‘US controls Trident’ comment. The CND of all people should know that’s illegal in the NPT
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
So back to my first point on billions of profits going to US corporations, Lockheed-Martin build and maintain the missiles, and they joint manage the warhead programme at Aldermaston. So we spend /will spend billions on the non-submarine element which will US corporate profits
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Als antwoord op @KevinPascoe @CNDuk
The missiles are a very small element of the system, especially when it comes to overall cost. Regardless, it’s a small price to pay for ultimate security and major world power. And why does it matter what country the company is registered in?
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Because we can’t afford decent conventional defence systems because of that white elephant
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Als antwoord op @KevinPascoe @CNDuk
How? We operate a good number of fixed and rotary wing aircraft, an aircraft carrier, good size escort and submarine fleet. What do you suggest is lacking?
2 antwoorden 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Critically manpower in the army, surface fleet size (inc. small craft for our waters), proper military martime surv. aircaft and generally an overreliance in all services on small number of high cost / high complexity assets eg F35. It’s about numbers we can’t afford with Trident
2 antwoorden 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Als antwoord op @KevinPascoe @CNDuk
F-35 is a world class asset, of course it’s going to cost. It’s an aircraft for the future, there is no cost alternative. It has again been budgeted alongside Trident for well into the future
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Except the forces can’t have the numbers of F35s they were promised
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Als antwoord op @KevinPascoe @CNDuk
138 on order, 48 budgeted for - more than enough for the two carriers. 17 currently in service, I expect to see at least 120 (providing Corbyn doesn’t get in, then I can only see the 48 on first order being acquired)
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks
You are completely in denial and brainwashed by the corporates.
-
-
Als antwoord op @KevinPascoe @CNDuk
How? The numbers have been formally announced, go read 2015 SSDR, or a simple FOI request to see the ordered numbers. That’s hardly being ‘brainwashed by cooperates’
0 antwoorden 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuksBedankt, Twitter gebruikt dit om je tijdlijn te verbeteren. Ongedaan makenOngedaan maken
-
Het laden lijkt wat langer te duren.
Twitter is mogelijk overbelast of ondervindt een tijdelijke onderbreking. Probeer het opnieuw of bekijk de Twitter-status voor meer informatie.