Cameron Says China Uncertainty Requires U.K. Nuclear Deterrent

[xav]

April 16 (Bloomberg) -- British Conservative Party leader David Cameron cited uncertainty over China as one of the reasons for Britain to maintain its nuclear deterrent, drawing an instant reprimand from Foreign Minister David Miliband.

“Are we really happy to say that we’d give up our independent nuclear deterrent when we don’t know what is going to happen with Iran, we can’t be certain of the future in China?” Cameron said in a debate last night against his rivals in May 6 elections, Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg. “I say we should always have the ultimate protection of our independent nuclear deterrent.”

Cameron made his comment in a rebuttal to Clegg’s call to abandon the Trident submarine-based nuclear-missile system.

“To put China and Iran in the same bracket is an insult to a fellow permanent member of the UN security council and to a country with whom we have just announced a close strategic relationship,” Miliband said in a statement issued just after the 90-minute televised debate. “David Cameron should withdraw this slur now.”

The Conservatives issued a statement saying, “David Cameron was demonstrating the extent of uncertainties in the world, not saying China is a threat to the U.K.”

Brown listed Iran and North Korea as reasons for Britain to upgrade its nuclear deterrent.

China, the world’s third-largest economy, is one the five nuclear-weapon states recognized by the 1970 Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, along with Britain, the U.S., Russia and France. North Korea withdrew from the NPT in 2003 and conducted its first nuclear-weapons test in 2006.

Britain and China are discussing with fellow United Nations Security Council members the U.S., France and Russia a fourth round of sanctions on Iran to pressure it to stop its nuclear program. Iran says it’s developing atomic power for civil purposes. The U.S., Britain and France say it’s developing nuclear weapons.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a6ZWF88zo.o0&pos=9

[Solvent]

LOL, so when Mr. Obama advocates to disarm unclear weapons. Cameron actually wants more. Maybe, its time for Obama to have a personal talk with him.

[Tucker217]

Personally I'd remove 2 or 3 nukes and say Ive removed about 100, simple.

[Solvent]

Personally I'd remove 2 or 3 nukes and say Ive removed about 100, simple.

Is it possible that I remove none and say I've removed 100?

[Niall]

Personally I think Cameron is worth a vote as he is definetly more switched on than Nick 'cancel all projects' Plebb.

[IconOfEvi]

If nukes are gone, what will happen to Duke Nukem :(?

[Tucker217]

What will happen if Iran or China launch a Nuke? thats more valid.

[RAFREGT.]

10 characters....

[RAFREGT.]

LOL, so when Mr. Obama advocates to disarm unclear weapons. Cameron actually wants more. Maybe, its time for Obama to have a personal talk with him.

Perhaps it's none of Obama's business what we decide to do. Or anyone else for that matter.
We ALREADY have the lowest amount of nukes for a western nuclear power. Best to deal with the very large stockpiles else where first.

Also, he wasn't talking of an increase, he was saying we should maintain our deterrent rather than get rid.

[SpankyMcCollins]

Perhaps it's none of Obama's business what we decide to do. Or anyone else for that matter.
We ALREADY have the lowest amount of nukes for a western nuclear power. Best to deal with the very large stockpiles else where first.

Also, he wasn't talking of an increase, he was saying we should maintain our deterrent rather than get rid.

x2 Absolutely, why should the UK disarm in the first place ?
We already have a low amount, maybe that amount should be a placeholder ? Clegg and his fetish to cancel everything has come out of no where, I hadn't even heard of the guy till the debates.

[happyslapper]

Going back to basics, did he really say anything wrong? It might be a diplomatic faux-pas to mention china 'in person', but he wasn't wrong by highlighting uncertainty associated withan ambitious nuclear power expanding at a raid rate, and increasingly infringing on issues of traditional western reserve. Issues which the retention of a 1st rate nuclear capability help safeguard against.

Those who watched the debate will know that his comments were not particularly outrageous, nor were they out of the wider context whichthe posted article ommits.

[happyslapper]

LOL, so when Mr. Obama advocates to disarm unclear weapons. Cameron actually wants more. Maybe, its time for Obama to have a personal talk with him.

Ignorant comment.

It's none of obama's business, especially considering we have the smallest nuclear stockpile of any declared nuclear power. Cameron isnot wanting more, he's wanting to upgrade and maintain the delivery system.

[Solvent]

Look like UK friends get ambitions on nuclear weapons. I say go ahead, why not? It seems that UK is indeed the prime target of China nuclear warheads. but who knows? What if she gets some extra.

[Ordie]

Its election time in the UK.

It may be the first hung parliament in many years.

Politicians are saying anything to get the votes.

[cn_habs]

Its election time in the UK.

It may be the first hung parliament in many years.

Politicians are saying anything to get the votes.

Ordie hit the nail on the head. :)

[Solvent]

Its election time in the UK.

It may be the first hung parliament in many years.

Politicians are saying anything to get the votes.

Therefore, politicians say silly things to get themselves elected?

[Corrupt]

Meh Milliband is a spineless worm. Cant stand him. Glad Cameron didnt retract the statement, it was a perfectly valid point.

[RAFREGT.]

Look like UK friends get ambitions on nuclear weapons. I say go ahead, why not? It seems that UK is indeed the prime target of China nuclear warheads. but who knows? What if she gets some extra.

Pure 100% troll.

[Wahnsinn]

Therefore, politicians say silly things to get themselves elected?

It seemed like more of a mistake to me than anything else but I may be wrong.

I thought the debate was interesting as Nick Clegg came out of it looking good but his parties policies, especially on trident, are just as stupid as before.

[Solvent]

Pure 100% troll.

Whatever you say, mate.

[acosta]

he is doing a campaign. but mentioning china is a stup!t move.

UK need a close tie with china, melting into G2 is the only way not drown with the whole Europe.

[Solvent]

It seemed like more of a mistake to me than anything else but I may be wrong.

I thought the debate was interesting as Nick Clegg came out of it looking good but his parties policies, especially on trident, are just as stupid as before.

IMHO, the politicians just pick easy target to say. Either they don't have guts to take on sensitive issues, like immigration and welfare, or they have no ideas how to solve tough problems like unemployment. Therefore, China, even China nuclear weapons which existing for half century, becomes handy. Sure, blame it, it wouldn't change anything and hurt anybody. And there are always somebody out there will buy it.

[happyslapper]

Its election time in the UK.

It may be the first hung parliament in many years.

Politicians are saying anything to get the votes.


Ordie hit the nail on the head. :)

Not really.

Cameron did not say anything of note (that was half the problem with that 'debate').

His brief justification for maintaining a highly capable delivery system was that we live in an uncertain world, where nuclear weapons offer Britain some certainty.

Iran, North Korea, and China were mentioned as sources of uncertainty. There is nothing wrong with that.

As for electioneering, it's only Nick Plebb who's using ''going nuclear'' with electioneering. The other two were maintaining the same debate as they have throughout the last term, and one that is in-line with British defensive posture since the early 50's.

You make it sound like he said something outrageous. He didn't.

[Tucker217]

Look like UK friends get ambitions on nuclear weapons. I say go ahead, why not? It seems that UK is indeed the prime target of China nuclear warheads. but who knows? What if she gets some extra.

Why would China target us since we import most of their crap made in their factories.

[cn_habs]

Not really.

Cameron did not say anything of note (that was half the problem with that 'debate').

His brief justification for maintaining a highly capable delivery system was that we live in an uncertain world, where nuclear weapons offer Britain some certainty.

Iran, North Korea, and China were mentioned as sources of uncertainty. There is nothing wrong with that.

As for electioneering, it's only Nick Plebb who's using ''going nuclear'' with electioneering. The other two were maintaining the same debate as they have throughout the last term, and one that is in-line with British defensive posture since the early 50's.

You make it sound like he said something outrageous. He didn't.

It's so laughable. The CCP's leadership is not stable enough? Who's having elections and fighting left and right?

[happyslapper]

It's so laughable. The CCP's leadership is not stable enough? Who's having elections and fighting left and right?

You're really determined to turn this into a China waaaah waaaah thread, aren't you?

China is an emergining power. That creates instability. Cameron, and the others, referred to global instability, not the instability of a single regime.

[martinexsquaddie]

nobody want to nuke us.
with the great Satan and Israel in play whose going to waste a nuke on the uk?
if your going nuke your taking out a priority Target and that just isn't us any more.


israel and the US defending the UK from nuclear terrorism by being more evil