The nuclear deterrent is not the only element of America's commitment to the region, of course.
It's not just critics of the nuclear deterrent that question whether that's still a reasonable figure.
During first minister's questions on Tuesday, Carwyn Jones suggested the nuclear deterrent could come to Milford Haven if forced to look for a home elsewhere.
But critics say Trident is too expensive, and there have been calls to either scrap the nuclear deterrent or switch to a cheaper land-based missile system.
It also asks if the government has assessed the risk of some corporate headquarters leaving Scotland, and how jobs would replace those linked to the nuclear deterrent.
With regard to Trident, they say it would involve the loss of thousands of jobs and would cost billions in enforced redeployment, should the nuclear deterrent have to be moved.
That safety, and indeed, the reliability and credibility of the nuclear deterrent will, accordingly, rely ever more critically on a dwindling number of highly skilled scientists, engineers and technicians in the U.S. nuclear weapons complex.
CENTERFORSECURITYPOLICY: Obama, unilateral Denuclearizer-in-Chief
And then just quickly on the Nuclear Posture Review -- what is your response to criticism from some who are saying that it just makes the United States less safe by taking a big -- the possibility of nuclear deterrent off the table?
Coalition divisions are also looming over the Trident nuclear deterrent.
In truth, it is appalling that neither the Democrat-controlled 103rd Congress nor the Republican-controlled 104th has taken the administration to task for an agenda that will, in due course, render the American nuclear deterrent unsustainable.
The vessels currently provide a nuclear deterrent because the submarines, under the waves in secret locations, would be almost impossible to destroy in a pre-emptive strike.
Shadow defence minister Kevan Jones said it was "absolutely right and necessary" for the UK to retain an independent nuclear deterrent but the cost needed to be taken into account.
The home of the UK's nuclear deterrent, Trident, is currently at Faslane on the Clyde.
In short, despite the welcome recognition of the need for credible sub-strategic nuclear deterrent forces for the foreseeable future, the actual decisions taken at the NATO summit set the stage for inaction on replacement of obsolescing systems and for new negotiations that will make it problematic even to retain the aging ones now deployed.
In an important analysis published recently by the Center for Security Policy, Vice Admiral Robert Monroe USN (Ret.), a former director of the Defense Nuclear Agency, argues persuasively that if we are to have any hope of preventing proliferation in the future, the United States must maintain a credible nuclear deterrent - and undertake the associated testing, developmental and industrial actions.
Russia has voiced strong opposition to the plan, saying it undermines the value of its nuclear deterrent.
They are urging the government to scrap the UK's nuclear deterrent developed at AWE - and cancel its replacement.
BBC: Berkshire protest against Trident nuclear weapons system
Workers at the firm that builds warheads for Trident, the UK's nuclear deterrent, have been urged to accept an improved pay offer.
However, one thing that has not changed is that the security of America continues to rest upon the strength of our nuclear deterrent.
Workers at the firm that builds warheads for Trident, the UK's nuclear deterrent, have voted in favour of accepting an improved pay offer.
He understands that as defense cuts lead to a decline in our conventional strength, the importance of our nuclear deterrent will only increase in future years.
The past four years have witnessed the dramatic decline of the U.S. nuclear weapons complex and the uniquely skilled workforce that is responsible for maintaining our nuclear deterrent.
The Trident missile system, Britain's nuclear deterrent, is carried by submarines based at the Faslane naval base on the Clyde, near Helensburgh.
In a dangerous world, with many states and organizations committed to acquiring and using nuclear weapons, it would be unwise for the United States not to make our nuclear deterrent force more effective.
At last, the debate has been joined about the future direction of America's nuclear deterrent - or indeed, whether there will even be such a deterrent down the road.
We believe that the United States will require for the foreseeable future a credible nuclear deterrent.
Now let me begin by discussing why I believe that the U.S. nuclear deterrent remains important and relevant.
Question: Would you agree to scrap the U.S. nuclear deterrent, or at least commit to do so, under present and foreseeable world conditions?
It is now clear that, as a practical matter under present and foreseeable circumstances, this agenda will only result in the unilateral disarmament of the U.S. nuclear deterrent.
It is imprudent in the extreme, not to say reckless, to rely upon as-yet-unavailable and -undemonstrated technologies to preserve something as important as the credibility, safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent.
应用推荐