Latest news with #F35A
Daily Mirror
2 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Is all this talk about war an attempt from Starmer to impress Donald Trump?
So Sir Keir Starmer is ramping up the rhetoric and re-upping on the UK's defence weaponry. The Prime Minister has announced a £1billion deal to buy 12 nuclear-ready F35A jets from the US. That will warm the hearts of the millions of UK citizens unaware of where their next meal will come from. Or the voters bracing themselves for welfare cuts. As the legendary rapper Tupac Shakur once said: 'They got money for wars but they can't feed the poor." The government is warning us to prepare for war on home soil for the first time since the German occupation of the Channel Islands during the Second World War. But why? The National Security Strategy document, out earlier this week, is suggesting there are threats from nukes, troops, terrorism, chemical warfare and so much much more. A country like the UK would have threats against it all the time. But if there is a specific, credible worry to us then surely they should be telling us, shouldn't they? Because it smells worryingly like an attempt to confect an appetite for war. Anyone able to think for themselves could be forgiven for noting a similarity with the flawed dossier used in 2003 to justify joining the US-led Iraq war. And it really does appear that we in this country have learned nothing from that devastating conflict. On the basis of 'sexed up' evidence - parroted on TV, radio and in print by every lapdog politician and his or her dog back then - Tony Blair's Labour government joined George for a conflict that the then-United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, would later describe as 'illegal'. Around 150,000 people - 120,000 of them civilians - died as a result. It was a war that would create new martyrs, new terrorists, new dangers, death and destruction in the west. Dissenters at the time were dismissed as unpatriotic as this country leaned into the bloodlust of which the current climate is frighteningly reminiscent. So, again, the question now is the same as it was then. Where is the evidence? Or was it an attempt to roll up his sleeve and flex his bicep to prove to US President Donald Trump that Starmer too is able to flex? Because, on the basis of historic Anglo-American foreign policy, a number of countries around the world have been burning flags and saying unkind things about the west for decades now. Far from ideal, but there you go. So what else? Iran, which hasn't attacked anyone directly for decades, has supposedly been three months away from a nuclear bomb for 30 years. They weren't even involved this whole caboodle until Israel starting bombing them last week. Now we hear that the US intelligence reports suggest the bombing raids over the weekend were nowhere near as successful in 'obliterating' the core component's of Iran's nuclear capability as Donald Trump has been suggesting. The US President has stuck to his guns and has adopted his favourite strategy of shooting the messengers, the media contingent willing to point out that actually, the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes. But sadly, while he and his ago remain intent on hunting down a Nobel Prize, the appetite here appears to be to foment that appetite for conflict. Even to characterise the Iranians as a clear and present danger - even though precisely nobody was talking in those terms even a month ago - is fascinating. Starmer seems determined to turn some of the attention onto himself, and it feels like an attempt to elbow his way into a conversation that doesn't concern this country. Throw in the fact that we in Britain love to invoke wartime rhetoric, and that Starmer can frame himself as the PM able to keep this country safe, and here we are. But we are whipping up fear when the facts completely contradict the narrative that our leaders in this country, across Europe and Stateside are pushing. And, worryingly, it has left Iran doing exactly what many feared: pulling out of talks to keep weapons inspectors apprised of what they are up to. You'd have to assume they will also carry on exploring the nuclear option after being told they cannot have one by the west - most of whose countries have one themselves. If Iran wanted to create any kind of WMD, for example, they'll have had the capability to do so - and use one - for years, wouldn't they? And even if you didn't want to surmise, what about the actual US Intelligence stating (until Trump's intervention) that there was no evidence the Iranians were knee deep in malign intent? What about the International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi who remains adamant that the Iranians had not been building a nuclear weapon? At what point did we stop listening to the experts in favour of the leaders keen to evoke war - euphemistically described as 'peace through strength' - on vibes? The big picture is that Mark Rutte, the Secretary General of NATO, is so desperate to keep Trump from pulling America out of the Alliance that his performance at Wednesday's media briefing was embarrassing. So much so that he needed a torch to climb out of the President's tradesman's entrance. It was little surprise, then, to see him soothing the ego of Trump by insisting the President and his utterly unqualified acolytes were right, you can bomb a mountain and wipe out materials buried so deep underground you'd need to enter another time zone to find them. It is the theatre of the absurd but whatever the truth of the matter, Starmer should be better than this. Much better. Ends
Washington Post
2 days ago
- Business
- Washington Post
U.K. to buy jets that can carry nuclear bombs as part of military buildup
Britain is embarking on an ambitious military buildup not seen in the country since the end of the Cold War, announcing on Monday that it is buying a dozen F-35A fighter jets capable of carrying nuclear bombs. Earlier this month, London released a defense review that outlined plans to acquire more attack submarines, boost space capabilities, create a new cyber-electromagnetic command, construct more munition factories and enhance its nuclear arsenal. The moves come against the backdrop of what Britain views as a looming threat from Russia and its concerns about the potential for a U.S. military drawdown from Europe in the coming years. 'Russian aggression menaces our continent. Strategic competition is intensifying. Extremist ideologies are on the rise,' British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in a statement outlining his country's new defense posture. 'It is an era of radical uncertainty.' The F-35A jets will expand Britain's nuclear warhead delivery options. Since the Cold War's end in the 1990s, Britain has relied on its nuclear-capable ballistic missile submarines for nuclear deterrence. With the F-35As, which can carry B61 nuclear bombs, Britain's air force is reacquiring nuclear capabilities it lost when it retired its airdropped nuclear bombs in 1998. The F-35As are generally cheaper than the F-35B jets that Britain already operates. A 2022 estimate from the Congressional Budget Office said each F-35A costs as low as $89 million while the F-35Bs cost at least $102 million per unit. The F-35As also offer higher fuel capacity and weapon payloads than the F-35Bs. Lockheed Martin is the lead manufacturer for the F-35A fighter jet, which is operated by 20 countries, including the United States. The jets will participate in NATO's nuclear dual capable aircraft missions, which involve European warplanes trained to operate U.S. nuclear bombs that are forward-deployed to Europe to deter Russia from launching a nuclear attack. Britain plans to acquire a total of 138 F-35 fighters, including the F-35B variant, according to its Defense Ministry. The ministry described the United Kingdom's security environment as the most volatile and uncertain 'at any time in the past 30 years,' in its defense review. It noted Russia's ongoing attack on Ukraine, the possibility of a U.S. military pivot to Asia that could reduce U.S. troop levels and the potential for war to reach the British homeland. This new atmosphere requires Britain to reorient its current force from one that is more optimized 'for conflicts primarily fought against non-state actors,' to one that can mobilize ''whole-of-society' preparations for war,' authors of the defense review, which was led by George Robertson, a former NATO secretary general and British defense secretary, wrote. To meet that goal, Britain pledged to increase national security spending to 5 percent of its GDP by 2035 — which will be the sum of a 3.5 percent defense budget and a 1.5 percent budget that will be considered 'defense-related.' Britain spends 2.3 percent of its GDP on defense today, down from 4.1 percent in 1989. Its military has 136,000 regular personnel, less than half of the 311,000 it had during the Cold War. With the additional funding, Britain aims to expand its nuclear-powered attack submarine fleet from today's nine up to 12, and acquire the ability to manufacture a new submarine every 18 months. It will seek to counter Russia's and China's rising threats in space, according to the review, which noted that the combined operational satellite fleets of the two countries increased by 70 percent in the 2019-2021 period. Britain will also invest 1.5 billion pounds, or around $2 billion, to build a pipeline for munitions as well as at least six new factories for munitions and explosives.
France 24
3 days ago
- Politics
- France 24
Alliance with "daddy" issues? NATO leaders flatter Trump to keep US on board
Promises and purchases: Britain buying 12 F35A fighter jets made in the US of A. Music to Trump's ears but how will that announcement go down with the likes of France which has been arguing for Europe to reduce its dependency on Washington? And then there's Ukraine. Trump in the end taking the meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskiy but there too mixed messages both when it comes to Russia's relentless campaign of aggression and the benefit of the doubt so often granted by Trump to Vladimir Putin. Produced by Rebecca Gnignati, Elisa Amiri, Ilayda Habip.
The Sun
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Sun
Chilling maps show terrifying apocalyptic power of Britain's new air-launched NUKES joining RAF's doomsday arsenal
CHILLING maps show the apocalyptic power of air launched nuclear weapons returning to Britain's doomsday arsenal. RAF Top Guns are set to fly with tactical nuclear weapons for the first time in 30 years. 3 3 It comes after the government ordered a dozen nuclear bombers that can carry American bombs. The F-35A bombers – to be based RAF Marham in Norfolk – are certified to carry American B-61 free fall nukes. The bombs are designed to give governments options in a spiralling state-on-state conflict. They are less destructive than doomsday weapons carried in the UK's nuclear deterrent submarines. But even the smallest H-Bomb – known as the B-61 Mod 3 – can engulf a whole city block in a thermo-nuclear fireball. It's payload is the equivalent of 300 tons of TNT explosives. If the bomb was dropped on a city, anyone inside an eight block radius would suffer horrific third degree burns as temperatures from the nuclear explosion can reach tens of millions of degrees celsius. The radioactive fall out would wipe an area the size of 200 football pitches. And if the bomb was primed to explode in the air – a split second before impact – the total blast area would cover an area of 800 football pitches. Larger versions of the B-61with have more than 1000 times more explosive power. Britain to test fire nuke missile in major show-of-force with sub launching 44ft Trident 2 for first time since 2016 But even they are dwarfed by the devastating power of warheads on Britain's Trident 2 missiles. Each Trident 2 missile can carry up to eight nuclear warheads. And the destructive power of each warhead ranges from 90 to 475 kilotons – or the equivalent of 475,000 tons of TNT. The blast radius of an single airburst warhead would flatten homes across an area the size of 12,000 football pitches. The total blast radius would be even bigger. But they warheads are designed to scatter as they plummet to earth from the edge of space – which means a single missile could render a capital totally uninhabitable. A former defence chief told The Sun: 'At the moment Britain has a gap in its arsenal. 'We have Tomahawk cruise missiles and Storm Shadows. 'Both of those can take out a hardened building or a bunker. 'But after that the only thing bigger is Trident.' Vladimir Putin threatened to drop a tactical nuke in 2022 as a terrifying 'show of force' in Ukraine. His troops had been forced to retreat on three fronts – in Kyiv, Kharkiv and Kherson – and he was furious at western support for Ukraine. It triggered a frantic diplomatic effort that saw China and India helping to to convince the tyrant to abort. We have Tomahawk cruise missiles and Storm Shadows. Both of those can take out a hardened building or a bunker Former defence chief The UK scrapped its air-launched nukes in 1998. Before that the WE-177 bomb – known by pilots as 'the shape' – was carried on Tornado jets. The new F-35As will be able to carry conventional and nuclear weapons, like the Tornados before them. Pilots sent on a nuclear raids risk being annihilated the blasts caused by their own weapons. An RAF source: 'These are gravity bombs, so it is not like a Storm Shadow that you can fire 200km from a target. 'It will depend on the size of the blast.' Before the Tornado's Britain's air launched nukes were carried on 'V Bombers' including the Avro Vulcan, which served until 1984. Modern nuclear jets are designed to withstand the deadly electro-magnetic pulse caused by nuclear explosions, which can fry electronics and causing aircraft to crash. During the Cold War the UK's tactical nukes were designed take out Russian infrastructure, including bridges. A Top Gun who trained to drop WE-177s said: 'This was before smart bombs, and guided bombs. 'Weapons were less precise in the 80s. So the best way to destroy a bridge would have been with a tactical nuke.' Britain still makes its own nuclear warheads for the Trident 2 missiles on submarines, at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston. But it is not expected to manufacture sovereign nukes for the fleet of F-35As. The RAF said the F-35As will be 'available to fly Nato's nuclear mission in a crisis'. They said it would, 'boost Britain's contribution to 'nuclear burden-sharing and deter those who would do the UK and our allies harm.' The RAF added: 'It reintroduces a nuclear role for the RAF for the first time since the UK retired its sovereign air-launched nuclear weapons following the end of the Cold War.' The US already has deals with a number of Nato nations to host and fly its nuclear bombs. The US Air Force has recently upgraded its nuclear storage bunkers at RAF Lakenheath in Norfolk, where its own F-35As are based.
Daily Mirror
3 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mirror
Britain's super-deadly nuclear weapons in full after chilling government warning
British military commanders boosted the UK's nuclear and conventional deterrence by buying super-deadly F35A warplanes to dominate the skies and ward of growing threats from hostile states Britain's multi-billion expansion into being able to carry nuclear weapons on brand new F35A fighter jets could ward off threats from multiple hostile states in the future. Or they can be more conventionally armed, used as super-deadly warplanes, screaming into combat in support of UK ground troops, taking out enemy jets or attacking military targets. The fifth generation £85m warplanes will compliment the UK's F3B's that are the 'punching power' of the Royal Navy's £3.5bn aircraft carriers HMS Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales. But the F35A's will be more versatile, more deadly and agile in the air as they operate by taking off from conventional runways land and have far greater ability to fly distances in defending British interests. The new move means the UK will have a more versatile and potent nuclear defence system than ever before, protecting the UK in the air and also at sea. And the UK government calculates that they are needed as it means they can help other NATO allies with a nuclear deterrence and boost Britain's power in the alliance. This all comes during the NATO summit where European allied leaders are hoping to pin down US President Donald Trump into committing to Article Five. It comes amid warnings that Russia may expand its war in Ukraine, attacking a European ally, China is muscle-flexing and the two have relationships with North Korea and Iran. This crucial Article Five agreement is an 'attack one, attack all' deal meaning if a hostile state assaults one NATO ally then it is an act of war against the entire alliance. The article has been invoked only once in the 70-year history of the Alliance: in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks on the United States. But it is the cornerstone of the NATO alliance. Though capable of carrying nuclear weapons the 12 new F35A's will be on standby to defend the UK and perhaps go to war with conventional weapons. The UK has had nuclear weapons since the early 1950's as the Cold War threat f rom post WWII conflict Russia escalated tensions across the globe. We were the third country to acquire nuclear weapons, behind the US and the Soviet Union. Crucially the UK has always stated the weapons, now Trident Missiles fired from one of four submarines, exist under a strict 'no first use policy.' That means the nukes can only be fired in an act of defence in reaction to an enemy country letting loose an atom missile as the UK or its interests. Operations of our nuclear-armed Vanguard Class Submarines mean one of the beasts is lurking beneath the waves at a top secret location constantly. But it does mean that the UK's enemies know that it constantly has a deadly sub on standby to react to nuclear attack if a rogue state presses the nuclear button. The deterrence means an enemy attacking the UK with a nuclear weapon knows it could be obliterated in response by a submarine probably nowhere near the UK. The operations carried out by our Vanguard Submarines are top secret to give the UK an edge over enemies and prevent a pre-emptive attack on them. The RAF says: 'The F-35A aircraft will be available to fly NATO's nuclear mission in a crisis, deepening the UK's contribution to NATO's nuclear burden-sharing arrangements, and deter those who would do the UK and our Allies harm. It reintroduces a nuclear role for the RAF for the first time since the UK retired its sovereign air-launched nuclear weapons following the end of the Cold War. 'This complements the UK's own operationally independent nuclear deterrent, strengthens NATO's nuclear deterrence, and underlines the UK's unshakeable commitment to NATO and the principle of collective defence under Article Five.' Here we detail Britain's current secretive nuclear deterrence operation, delving into some of its history, its future and looking at how it will in future protect the UK. The F35A fighter jet The new warplane is immensely potent and travels a greater distance than its F35B cousin since it uses conventional runways. The F35B is a STOVL plane, meaning Short Take Off Vertical Landing as it takes off and returns to an aircraft carrier. The F35B uses so much power taking off and landing that it has limited range of just 900 miles - or roughly just under the length of Britain from Land's End to John O'Groats. But the F35A has a range of 1,200 miles, giving it an extra edge since it does not use as much power in take-off and landing. It can fly conventional and nuclear weapons. Our nuclear-armed Vanguard fleet The UK's Vanguard-Class subs are led by HMS Vanguard and include Victorious, Vigilant, and Vengeance, each capable of carrying up to 16 missiles each. These submarines are also nuclear-powered and can stay beneath the waves, fully operational for many months. At least one is on patrol somewhere in the world 's oceans at any one time. The Vanguards have a crew of 130 officers and sailors. The submarines operate with two separate crews, Port and Starboard, to ensure continuous patrols. While one crew is on patrol, the other is either training or on leave. The crew size is smaller compared to the older Resolution-class submarines they replaced, despite the Vanguard-class being larger. They will be replaced at some stage by the new Dreadnought-Class submarines which will also carry US-made Trident weapons. According to the MoD four new Dreadnought class ballistic missile submarines will be ready in the 2030s and were first announced in 2015. They will take over duty as part of Britain's operation Continuous at Sea Deterrence. The UK's nuclear weapons The UK has around 225 nuclear warheads and the Vanguard Submarines carries around 16 Trident II D5 nuclear missiles. Each missile can carry up to eight warheads, which means each missile can unleash on eight targets in mid-air. Interestingly the Vanguards also carry Spearfish Torpedoes to be used to defend itself against other enemy submarines and surface warships. Around 150 nuclear weapons are ready for operations and the rest are held in reserve. Our Trident missiles have a strength or yield of 100 kilotons - eight times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. The Trident missiles are US made, US maintained and the UK leases them from America. Britain's new fighter F35A jets will, if needed, be armed with American-made B61 gravity bombs. These are low-to-intermediate yield strategic and tactical nuclear weapons so they can be used for massive blasts or local, smaller, blasts used on the battlefield to help friendly forces. They can have a yield of from 0.3 to 340 kilotons in its various modes.
