Britons face call to fight in the armed forces if UK goes to war with Russia, top chief warns

a reply to: ohahhupthera

Well, they have had that capability since 1961 with the "Tsar Bomba" and yet here we are still standing.

Not exactly the most versatile of device all the same, and overkill for even the job your suggesting.

What you are alluding to all the same is the Russian Satan 2(Sarmat) ICBM and accompanying warhead payload.

Again through a nuclear strike on the UK would immediately provoke Article 5 and Russia would be decimated in response via sub-launched ICBM.

It's a M.A.D scenario hence not desirable to either side.

Putin cannot win a nuclear exchange anymore than we can hence the reason it's never apt to be on the cards.

It would be like taking a straight razor across your own throat to win a hand of poker.

If nuclear war started I'd hope to be annihilated, to hell with still being here to deal with the after effects and decimation from it.

You might be alive if you survive but you wouldn't be living.

a reply to: andy06shake

I read a piece years ago from a scientist involed with the Tsar project, And how they defied their orders and only used half the yield that was wanted by the top brass , risking the lives of them and their families , if they had followed orders we would not have been born to type on the Internet .

a reply to: stu119

Yeah, it might sound good to play Fallout 4, but i would not want to live it for real.

Ffs the Radroach would have me screaming like a baby for a start.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: SprocketUK

Well, better on your feet than on your knees i suppose if it has to be the end.

Do you think you'll have a choice. When you get those 5 or 6 men dragging you to your knees, you will die on your knees like a good little infidel to get your head chopped off. By the way that's sarcasm, true maybe, but sarcasm.

a reply to: stonerwilliam

There was speculation just like with the Ivy Mike device it may ignite the planet's atmosphere.

The thing is the conditions necessary to sustain a chain reaction capable of igniting the atmosphere are highly improbable and far beyond the capabilities of any current or foreseeable human technology to date.

The original design of the Tsar Bomba had a yield of around 100 megatons, which is about 4000 times more powerful than the bombs dropped on Hiroshima.

The drop in yield was indeed apparently due to concerns about the potential environmental and humanitarian impact the device may have had on the archipelago and subsequently the rest of the surrounding area.

a reply to: crayzeed

We always have a choice crayzeed.

And there is always one more thing you can do.

That is not sarcasm but optimism.

Never lose hope, and stuff giving in to Tory peer pressure to fight wars in far-off places.

The only way people in the UK should fight is to defend their own shores and skies.

It's the only scenario i would consider fighting for my nation.

And i don't imagine i would be the only one in that camp really.

If the poor Russian people had adopted that attitude Putin would have been on to plums with his failed land grab by my guess.

People are getting very mixed up on this post. Let me make things clear.
1. This call is for a citizens army, not the regular army.
2. It is for inside the UK only.
3.They will NOT be sent abroad or to any foreign war scene.
4.They will have virtually no chance of being killed or injured.
5. This is voluntary not conscription.
Now, with that in mind just which demographic will fill those places. Cos the British youths wont.

a reply to: crayzeed

If its simply a citizen's army being called to be created then i have to ponder how it's going to be funded, never mind why?

The majority of the people on this island already have serious trust issues where the Police are concerned.

Can you imagine how they would feel about armed soldiers in droves doing the bidding of the government or being on the streets 24/7 causing trouble?

That's apt to go down like a lead balloon and possibly bring about civil war in our own nation by my guess.

Germany thinks it also need more men to army , Bundeswehr . Additional 20000 persons needed .

Germany Weighs Enlisting Foreigners in Military Amid Recruitment Woes

Slowly over many years uk has made the army smaller and smaller.
This IT the fault of the UK gov.

originally posted by: crayzeed
People are getting very mixed up on this post. Let me make things clear.
1. This call is for a citizens army, not the regular army.
2. It is for inside the UK only.
3.They will NOT be sent abroad or to any foreign war scene.
4.They will have virtually no chance of being killed or injured.
5. This is voluntary not conscription.
Now, with that in mind just which demographic will fill those places. Cos the British youths wont.

LOL !
hey look a flying pig!
the Army Go ware they are TOLD.

Doesn't really matter. If the uk goes to war with Russia it would lose conventional war.

But that wouldn't happen, nukes would fly. Russia could easily survives the uks nukes, the uk would become ashes.

As for article 5, I'm betting that the rest of nato would stay out of it at the risk of getting nuked themselves.

originally posted by: Maybenexttime
Doesn't really matter. If the uk goes to war with Russia it would lose conventional war.

But that wouldn't happen, nukes would fly. Russia could easily survives the uks nukes, the uk would become ashes.

As for article 5, I'm betting that the rest of nato would stay out of it at the risk of getting nuked themselves.

Can NATO countries simply stay out of it? If one country is nuked isn't the whole world essential nuked too?

a reply to: Scratchpost

Of course, it's the government's fault.

It's their responsibility to maintain the armed forces and the power lies specifically with our "Ministry of Defence".

Its the "Secretary of State for Defence" who heads the "Ministry of Defence" and is ultimately responsible for our armed forces.

Subsequent administrations, including the one currently at the helm of the nation, have gutted our armed forces from the inside out.

The same they have just about every other service the nation has to offer, from public transport to the NHS.

Hence the reason nobody in the correct frame of mind would be willing to die for the bastards, here, there, or anywhere else really, unless it is to defend there's and their own.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Maybenexttime
Doesn't really matter. If the uk goes to war with Russia it would lose conventional war.

But that wouldn't happen, nukes would fly. Russia could easily survives the uks nukes, the uk would become ashes.

As for article 5, I'm betting that the rest of nato would stay out of it at the risk of getting nuked themselves.

Can NATO countries simply stay out of it? If one country is nuked isn't the whole world essential nuked too?

Well I'm assuming the uk would go to war with Russia, which would be a joke with 73k soldiers. Article 5 and the mad doctrine suggests all of nato would get involved.

However reality is different. Would you want your country to be totally destroyed over the uk? I think most of the countries that hold nukes in nato would in reality stay out of it for self preservation.

Not many countries actually like the uk. I mean even the relationship between the USA equates to Britain doing as its told. Take the houthis for example, never the threat to uk vessels but as the usas lapdog it joined in as requested by the USA.

Totally disgusting proposal.

Majority of Brits are conscientious and do object to war. We do not need to be told what is right and proper.

With a general election imminent, Sunak has miscalculated how he can have his Thatcher moment. MOD etc can smell it, now is the time for iron striking.

A fully trained standing army to defend our shores = absolutely right. If we are invaded, there would be no need for any constructed citizen's army - there is hardly a Brit, man, woman, child, who would not find a way to fight and defend our own territory.

I think if any politician called for war on foreign soil, there ought be a referendum. If the vote is a nay, no war.

As to Russia being a threat to Britain, Putin once described Cameron ''an insignificant little man leading an insignificant little island'', current leaders would have to increase their significance before Russia represented any threat to us. Perhaps Rishi could send out some advice, ''invade the UK and the pot-holes and crumbling masonary will get ya''.

originally posted by: Maybenexttime

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Maybenexttime
Doesn't really matter. If the uk goes to war with Russia it would lose conventional war.

But that wouldn't happen, nukes would fly. Russia could easily survives the uks nukes, the uk would become ashes.

As for article 5, I'm betting that the rest of nato would stay out of it at the risk of getting nuked themselves.

Can NATO countries simply stay out of it? If one country is nuked isn't the whole world essential nuked too?

Well I'm assuming the uk would go to war with Russia, which would be a joke with 73k soldiers. Article 5 and the mad doctrine suggests all of nato would get involved.

However reality is different. Would you want your country to be totally destroyed over the uk? I think most of the countries that hold nukes in nato would in reality stay out of it for self preservation.

Not many countries actually like the uk. I mean even the relationship between the USA equates to Britain doing as its told. Take the houthis for example, never the threat to uk vessels but as the usas lapdog it joined in as requested by the USA.

Would you want your country to be totally destroyed over the uk? I think most of the countries that hold nukes in nato would in reality stay out of it for self preservation.

How does a country or the peoples of that country measure self-preservation when it comes to nukes, or allowing one country to get off scott-free by deploying a nuke? There is a duty there.

When will you people get it? It aint about any invasion. It aint about any war abroad. It's about setting up a force inside the UK and it aint about any British people in it either. Please go and read my first post cos I don't want to have to type it again.
Oh, and Andy, that's pessimism not optimism.

I don't see any sources posted for specifics, are there any?