Be Excellent To Each Other

PWRs still use steam to generate power, just not within the reactor itself. That's my understanding at least, I know you've actually worked in the industry

Oh! Hahah. That's what you get for talking to a nuke tech and not the actual powerplant engineers. (At least where I worked, there was a fairly clear line between the two, defined by whether the stuff you worked with could kill you via radiation or merely by exploding superhot gas.)

You're right, of course. I had totally forgotten that PWRs use steam in the secondary circuit that actually generates the power. As far as I can tell from a quick Google, Vanguard class subs are no different, although it's always a bit fuzzy because (a) seekrit military stuff and (b) sub power plants have weird constraints that civil nuclear does not.

People have had enough of experts.

I have been on one

Yup.

Yup.

You've "been on" an expert? Like, sexually?

I've often wondered about slavery in the old South - it seems to me that slaves were expensive, and unskilled "free" labour was cheap, and available seasonally. Was buying ( and housing and feeding ) a slave actually cheaper than hiring some Irish immigrant?

I voted Labour in GE, I think May would be better than Corbyn. He has to go.

Often they were security for debts, so even if you wanted to get rid of them (and many states made it very difficult to do this, especially after Nat Turner), you would be unable to do so.

I will be supporting my party’s policy tonight. But for the first time I think ever we have witnessed the leader of the Labour party stand up at the despatch box of this House and argue against the policy of the party that he leads. This is unprecedented. Moreover this reckless, juvenile, narcissistic irresponsibility makes me fearful of the party that I love. The sheer stupidity of this approach should be dragged out into the light and seen for what it is, because not only is renewal Labour party policy, it is the settled will of the country, and every parliamentary decision relating to it will have been taken by 2020.

The Nuclear deterrent... is it supposed to just discourage ANYONE from attacking us, or is it just meant to discourage others with nuclear weapons launching them at us?

That this House supports the government’s assessment in the 2015 National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review that the UK’s independent minimum credible nuclear deterrent, based on a continuous at sea deterrence posture, will remain essential to the UK’s security today as it has for over 60 years, and for as long as the global security situation demands, to deter the most extreme threats to the UK’s national security and way of life and that of the UK’s allies; supports the decision to take the necessary steps required to maintain the current posture by replacing the current Vanguard Class submarines with four Successor submarines; recognises the importance of this programme to the UK’s defence industrial base and in supporting thousands of highly skilled engineering jobs; notes that the government will continue to provide annual reports to parliament on the programme; recognises that the UK remains committed to reducing its overall nuclear weapon stockpile by the mid-2020s; and supports the government’s commitment to continue work towards a safer and more stable world, pressing for key steps towards multilateral disarmament.

We should just outsource the deterrent to the Yanks. If I'm getting vaporised I don't really give a shit if we get revenge, but Americans love that.

We should just outsource the deterrent to the Yanks. If I'm getting vaporised I don't really give a shit if we get revenge, but Americans love that.

Let me turn to the issue of whether we could simply rely on other nuclear armed allies like America and France to provide our deterrent. The first question is, how would America and France react if we suddenly announced that we were abandoning our nuclear capabilities but still expecting them to put their citizens at risk to protect us in a nuclear crisis? That is hardly standing shoulder to shoulder with our allies.

"The most extreme threats" it says so i think nukes, biological warfare, nukes and Jonny Halliday.

Eh, that makes sense.

Also, isn't the Trident system already developed by the Americans anyway? Lockheed Martin, I think?

Jaime Reed, Labour MP just now



Going well, then.

Playing Devil's Advocate, not all of the Labour Party MPs will be voting pro-Trident. I'd be interested to see what percentage do that.

Order. Mr Shelbrooke, I want you to aspire to the apogee of statesmanship, but shrieking from a sedentary position, despite your magnificent suit, is not the way to achieve it. Calm yourself, man; I am trying to help you, even if you don’t know it.

Mhairi Black On trident

https://twitter.com/MhairiBlack/status/ ... 3859840000

My reasons for voting against Trident renewal.https://t.co/XVHOYcvgNN

— Mhairi Black MP (@MhairiBlack) July 18, 2016

If these weapons are not a security necessity and they are not necessary to save jobs, that prompts the question: what are they for? The fact of the matter is that this is all really about the UK maintaining a permanent place on the UN Security Council. As the hon. Member for Tonbridge and Malling (Tom Tugendhat), who is unfortunately not in his seat, made clear, these weapons serve no purpose other than satisfying the ego of the British establishment. This is about us putting our stamp on a world from which we are isolating ourselves more and more.

#contribution-16071850000079" class="postlink">Hansard link



I'd argue that being a permanent member of the UN Security Council is worth preserving and means we're not isolating ourselves. Not sure if it require nuclear weapons to do that but it probably helps.

needed.

Well that's the debate, isn't it. Do we need a nuclear arsenal if the US have one 1000 times the size? What's the point?

I've never really understood this obsession with trying to play with the big boys.

Lies.

I do think use of 'bias' as an adjective is my current greatest pedantry bugbear.

I'm eagerly awaiting the 'Private Eye' parody. Will she be the headmistress, or will they try something different?

The good thing about that is that it doesn't state any particular political point. Everyone can join in! Leaver, remainer, Labour, Conservative, you can all get angry at the BBC together!