
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.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
'I didn't call him daddy!' Nato chief insists he did not call Donald Trump daddy... like that
Nato chief Mark Rutte has been forced to backtrack on an embarrassing remark - where he apparently called US president Donald Trump 'daddy.' During a meeting of the defence bloc in the Hague yesterday, Rutte and Trump met following the US president's crass comment on the Iran-Israel war. It was there that the US President he said: 'We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f*** they're doing.' Rutte said on Wednesday that 'Daddy has to use strong language' to get Israel and Iran to sort things out, to which Trump agreed. 'You have to use strong language. Every once in a while you have to use a certain word,' the president said. But the Nato chief's comments raised eyebrows across the world, and later in the day Rutte, the former prime minister of the Netherlands, was forced to backtrack. He said: 'The daddy thing, I didn't call [Trump] daddy, what I said, is that sometimes... In Europe, I hear sometimes countries saying, "hey, Mark, will the US stay with us?" 'And I said, "that sounds a little bit like a small child asking his daddy, 'hey, are you still staying with the family'"? So in that sense, I use daddy, not that I was calling President Trump daddy.' But Trump himself appeared to enjoy being called 'daddy' as he was referred to at Wednesday's Nato Summit in the Hague by Rutte, who has led the defence bloc since October 2024. During Trump's whirlwind press conference that marked his final appearance at the summit, a reporter asked him how he felt when Rutte had referred to the American president as 'daddy' earlier in the day. Secretary of State Marco Rubio (right) giggles behind President Donald Trump (left) as he answered questions about being called 'daddy' by Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte during the Wednesday conference in the Hague, Netherlands 'No, he likes me, I think he likes me! If he doesn't I'll let you know and I'll come back and I'll hit him hard OK?' Trump told the journalist. 'He did it very affectionately though,' Trump continued. '"Daddy, you're my daddy,"' the president said with a smile. Alongside Trump was the usually stoic Secretary of State Marco Rubio. But the former Florida senator couldn't contain his laughter, bending down and giggling during the back-and-forth. The president had previously mouthed the F-word at a campaign rally in 2016 and used the word 'bulls***' while making a briefing room appearance earlier this year. Trump also said during his meeting with Rutte that he believed the Iran-Israel ceasefire will hold. 'They're not going to be fighting each other, they've had it,' the president argued. 'Like two kids in the schoolyard, they fight like hell, you can't stop them. Let them fight for two or three minutes then it's easy to stop them.' The 'schoolyard' comment prompted Rutte's 'daddy' observation. During Trump's press conference, the reporter followed up by asking if the U.S. president viewed 'your Nato allies as sort of children?' 'They're obviously listening to you and they're spending more, and are obviously appreciative of that. But do you think they can actually defend Europe on their own, without you?' the journalist asked. Trump said he believed the European nations would 'need a little help at the beginning.' 'And I think they'll be able to,' he continued. 'And I think they're going to remember this day and this is a big day for Nato, this is a very big day.' Earlier on Wednesday the Nato nations agreed to something Trump had long pushed - a massive increase in defence spending. Most of the 32 Nato countries agreed to language that said 'allies commit to invest 5 percent of GDP annually on core defense requirements as well as defense-and security-related spending by 2035.' But Nato member Spain pushed back on the agreement, and said it would increase its spending to just 2 per cent, which Trump said he would respond to by forcing high tariffs on the nation. He said he doesn't know what 'the problem' with Spain, calling the country's position unfair to other members of the Nato alliance. 'They want a little bit of a free ride, but they'll have to pay it back to us on trade,' he said, making up for it through higher tariffs. But Spain belongs to the European Union, the world's largest trading bloc, which negotiates trade deals on behalf of all 27 member countries. They are not meant to negotiate trade deals individually. Asked about that, Trump said, 'I'm going to negotiate directly with Spain. I'm going to do it myself.' The reporter pressed again asking Trump if the European nations could defend themselves without the U.S. 'Well ask Mark, I think you have to ask Mark, OK?' Trump said. The president was previously nicknamed 'daddy' by former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who broke with Trump recently over the president's decision to bomb Iran's three nuclear sites this past weekend. The president has since left The Hague after spending less than 24 hours there for the NATO summit. The summit wrapped up Wednesday and Trump held a subsequent press conference. Air Force One, which had touched down on Tuesday at 7:36 p.m. local time, took off from Amsterdam Airport Schiphol shortly before 6 p.m. local time. The flight was expected to take more than six hours, putting Trump back at the White House on Wednesday evening.


Reuters
44 minutes ago
- Reuters
Mamdani's stunning upset in New York's Democratic mayoral primary carries risks, rewards for national Democrats
NEW YORK, June 25 (Reuters) - Self-described democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani's unexpected upset in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary on Tuesday exhilarated progressive activists, who had banded together to prevent the more moderate former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo from triumphing. But the surprise outcome also generated excitement from a very different group of people: national Republicans. Soon after it became clear that Mamdani, a 33-year-old state lawmaker, was likely to prevail, Republican Vice President JD Vance sent congratulations on social media to the "new leader of the Democratic Party." The Republican's congressional campaign arm called him an "antisemitic socialist radical" and promised to tie him to every vulnerable Democrat in next year's midterm elections. And on Wednesday, Republican President Donald Trump - a native New Yorker - piled on, writing on social media, "It's finally happened, the Democrats have crossed the line. Zohran Mamdani, a 100% Communist Lunatic, has just won the Dem Primary, and is on his way to becoming Mayor." The reactions underscore both the risks and the rewards for the Democratic Party - still trying to find its footing five months into Trump's term - in having an unabashed left-wing nominee running in the country's biggest city this fall. Mamdani's campaign, which drew plaudits for its cheery tone and clever viral videos, could help energize young voters, a demographic that Democrats are desperate to reach in 2026 and beyond. His rise from a virtual unknown was fueled by a relentless focus on affordability, an issue Democrats struggled to address during last year's presidential race. "Cost of living is the issue of our time," Neera Tanden, the chief executive of Democratic think tank Center for American Progress wrote on X in response to Mamdani's win. "It's the through line animating all politics. Smart political leaders respond to it." His history-making candidacy – Mamdani, born in Uganda to Indian parents, would be the city's first Muslim and Indian American mayor – could also drive engagement among Asian and especially Muslim voters, some of whom soured on the party after the Biden administration's support for Israel's war in Gaza. 'These elections aren't about left, right or center, they're about whether you're a change to the status quo. People don't want more of the same, they want someone who plays a different game,' said Democratic strategist Jesse Ferguson. But Mamdani's criticism of Israel and his democratic socialism are also likely to show up frequently in Republican attack ads. Much of the Democratic establishment had lined up behind Cuomo, including former President Bill Clinton, partly out of unease over Mamdani's platform. Mamdani has repeatedly said he is not antisemitic. "I think he's an easy target for Republicans who want to use scare tactics to talk about the Muslim mayor from New York City who's uber-left," said Patrick Egan, a political science professor at New York University. But Egan noted, Mamdani has also proven to be an adept politician. "When people get exposed to this guy, they tend to like him," he said. Basil Smikle, a political analyst and professor at Columbia University's School of Professional Studies, said heavy-handed attacks on Mamdani could backfire by energizing "a lot of the Democratic voters to want to push more against Trump." "I don't think it hurts Democrats in the long run," he said. "I actually think it helps them." For his part, Mamdani seemed ready to embrace his role as a party leader, telling supporters in his victory speech that he would govern the city "as a model for the Democratic Party – a party where we fight for working people with no apology." He vowed to use his mayoral power to "reject Donald Trump's fascism." Democratic voters say they want a new generation of leaders and a party that concentrates on economic issues, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll earlier this month. "The Democratic Party is trying to figure itself out," said Christina Greer, a political science professor at Fordham University in New York. While Mamdani enters the general election as the favorite in a city dominated by Democrats, the race is more unsettled than usual. Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat, is running as an independent after his popularity plummeted following his indictment on corruption charges and the subsequent decision by Trump's Justice Department to drop the case. Cuomo also retains the ability to run as an independent, though he has not yet decided whether to do so. The Republican candidate is Curtis Sliwa, the founder of the Guardian Angels. Jim Walden, a former federal prosecutor, is running as an independent, as well. The primary had become a two-man race by Election Day between Mamdani and Cuomo, echoing other Democratic nominating contests in which the party's establishment and liberal wings have wrestled for power. But it was also a generational clash between Mamdani and Cuomo, the 67-year-old scion of a New York political family. That said, Cuomo carried plenty of personal baggage, four years after he resigned the governorship amid allegations of sexual harassment, which he has denied. "Some people were voting for Mamdani to express their displeasure for Cuomo," Greer said. Mamdani's unlikely ascension bore some of the same hallmarks of similar rises for two other democratic socialists, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders and U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, both of whom endorsed his campaign. Sanders, an independent, emerged as a leading Democratic presidential candidate in 2016 and 2020, while Ocasio-Cortez pulled off an upset in 2018 by defeating a longtime incumbent Democrat.


Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Is your restaurant halal?
Dos Mas Tacos opened recently next to Spitalfields Market, one of London's trendiest and busiest areas. Two beef birria tacos cost £11.50; two mushroom vegano are £10.50; a 'can-o-water' is £2.50. But look a little closer at their menu, and something jumps out: no pork and no alcohol. You'd expect a carnitas option at a taqueria, and you'd want a Corona with it. You can't get either at Dos Mas Tacos. Huh? Or maybe hmm. I came across the place on TikTok, via a video of the two founders, Rupert and Charlie Avery, outside their shop. They're well-heeled lads, twins with posh accents. They used to work in the superyacht industry. 'Hey everyone!' one brother says. 'Just to let you guys all know' – in the classic TikTok singsong tone – 'we definitely don't have any pork in our kitchen, as well as no alcohol in the kitchen as well.' They gesture towards the 'comments we've been having'. The other brother then proudly shows the camera their halal butchers' certificate, which is approved by Muslim clerics. 'This is where we buy all of our meat from, so again, just to clarify that as well!' I read the comments. 'Everyone tag this place and go. Support these guys. W [Win] Birria Tacos,' reads one, which has 6,421 likes. Not everyone is positive. 'No thanks mate – definitely will not be coming back'; 'Defo won't eat here then'; 'Look forward to reading Dos Mas Tacos is in receivership'; 'Another reason to avoid' (2,420 likes). On the face of it, Dos Mas Tacos's decision is curious. Here are two British chaps serving a typically non-halal cuisine in a country and city where most people do not follow halal. Yet there is clearly a demand for it, driven by social media reviews. I've been noticing similar stories around London. In 2023, the most popular opening in Soho was Supernova, a French-run joint that served smashburgers. After about a year, it went 'finally halal' and gained even more TikTok traffic. The longest queue I've seen outside a London restaurant was for Swiss Butter in Holborn. The menu didn't seem special. It was just steak frites, but halal. Last year, the Noodle Inn arrived in Soho, serving northern Chinese cuisine. There were long queues for this too, and it's still immensely popular, but there seems to have been resistance to it not serving halal. An Instagram story from its account last week read: 'FYI Please note: We are not currently halal, but it is something we are actively working towards. Thank you for understanding.' Had Noodle Inn been getting 'comments', too? Let's try to understand why so many restaurants are going halal. Well, from a commercial point of view, why wouldn't you? Even in 2016, it accounted for 8 per cent of the UK's total food and drink spend. Clearly that has risen since then. Fifteen per cent of London's population is Muslim, a figure which is also growing. And halal customers eat more meat per capita than other people. While Muslims make up 6.5 per cent of Britain's population, they account for 30 per cent of lamb eaten in England alone. Running a restaurant isn't easy these days, so why would you deliberately lose customers by serving food they won't eat? Especially as many customers who aren't Muslim won't even notice if a restaurant is halal. James Chiavarini, who owns Il Portico and La Palombe in Kensington, tells me: 'If your business model is lowest common denominator, and it's high volume, high turnover, then it makes sense to go halal. Whereas the food that I do, I try to be a little more curated and elevated. I can't do lowest common denominator, I'm crap at it.' More places than you'd think serve halal meat. Most of London's fried chicken shops – including the popular chains Wingstop and Slim Chickens – are entirely halal. So are a fifth of Nando's branches. As the company's website says: 'Non-halal meat never enters a halal restaurant: even the chicken livers and prego steak rolls are halal!' Other non-chain examples include Bake Street, a brilliant brunch restaurant in Clapton. It attracts all demographics (including me) with its smashburgers and crème brûlée cookies. Gymkhana in Mayfair, one of only four Indian restaurants in the world with at least two Michelin stars, says on its website that its 'chicken, lamb and goat are halal certified'. Does all this make you queasy? It certainly has that effect on Rupert Lowe, who said in parliament recently: 'We are all eating halal meat without knowing it. I find that morally repugnant. We should ban non-stun slaughter, we should ban halal slaughter and we should ban kosher slaughter.' Kosher, incidentally, does not permit pre-stunning, while 88 per cent of halal meat is from pre-stunned animals. However, of the 30 million non-stunned slaughtered animals last year, 27 million were halal and three million were kosher. Lowe wants a full ban, the favourite national solution to things we don't like. Others prefer labelling, which seems fair. If Boris Johnson imposed calorie counts on restaurant menus, then customers are at least entitled to know if their food is halal. Let's remember, though, that we don't think rationally or consistently about this sort of stuff: consider the poor piggies gassed for bacon, the non-dairy calves snuffed out in days for their uselessness, the quail necks we snap, the chickens stunned agonisingly slowly in electric water baths. Halal is an easy target, but so much about the way animals live and die in this country, particularly ones bred for our chain restaurants, is grim. Eating less but better meat from restaurants or butchers is an obvious way forward, but then an awful hangover occasionally prescribes a sub-tenner fry-up for all of us. We are flawed etc. As I read the TikTok comments, I also think this: pressuring a restaurant to conform to your culinary wishes is strange. If it is not halal, you can go elsewhere – particularly in London, where there are 40,000 places to eat out, many of which are exclusively halal. And if a restaurant goes that way for commercial reasons, that also betrays a strange, slightly fearful attitude to hospitality. So here's my advice to restaurants: ignore the comments and do what you want. The customer isn't always right.