5 ms·

I hardly think this is surprising - countries that use the same reactors for power generation and production of materials for weapons are going to have some cro

I hardly think this is surprising - countries that use the same reactors for power generation and production of materials for weapons are going to have some cross subsidies of some kind. What I find surprising is that nobody ever comments on the fact that the UK literally operates US nuclear missiles with warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs. Not to mention the lack of permissive action locks on the UK weapons... Edit: I should have been clearer that I meant was discussion outside of the UK about these issues.

ovi256 7y ago
>same reactors for power generation and production of materials for weapons This is mostly about the engineering capability for building submarine propulsion reactors, not weapons. Note the article never mentioned weapons. Sustaining that engineering capability through the lean years between submarine projects through power generation projects is seen by the pacifict environmentalist groups as a cross subsidy that they don't want to provide. > warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs Supposedly the UKs are domestic designs with more stealth and penetration aids.
- arethuza 7y ago
  Ah - my mistake - should have read the article more carefully! We could always do what we did the last time we forgot how to build submarines and simply ask the US how to do it?
jibbit 7y ago
Not sure what you mean by "no one ever talks about it". Which CND meetings have you been to?
lmm 7y ago
> What I find surprising is that nobody ever comments on the fact that the UK literally operates US nuclear missiles with warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs. Huh? That's absolutely a common talking point whenever a conversation about "renewing Trident" or similar comes up.
ggm 7y ago
UK literally operates US nuclear missiles with warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs. The thing being this was a negotiated outcome to prevent the destabilization of a system by the introduction of an independent nuclear source. France was bad enough: the Americans and Russians didn't want Britain making ICBM. (Obviously I doubt the Russians were consulted) This is why black arrow was cancelled: the US promised Polaris if the UK ceased rocket tests in Australia.
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  As a "junior partner" it's good to see that the US allow us a few toys.
chrisseaton 7y ago
> What I find surprising is that nobody ever comments on the fact that the UK literally operates US nuclear missiles with warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs. The fact that they’re US designs was one of the major discussion points of the recent renewal debate - people from across the political spectrum commented on it extensively for months. There are no PALs in order to support a credible threat of retaliation. The UK is small enough that it’s possible that the whole country would have been destroyed by a first strike. This is how nuclear weapons ‘work’ - by credible threat.

ovi256 7y ago

>same reactors for power generation and production of materials for weapons This is mostly about the engineering capability for building submarine propulsion reactors, not weapons. Note the article never mentioned weapons. Sustaining that engineering capability through the lean years between submarine projects through power generation projects is seen by the pacifict environmentalist groups as a cross subsidy that they don't want to provide. > warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs Supposedly the UKs are domestic designs with more stealth and penetration aids.

arethuza 7y ago
Ah - my mistake - should have read the article more carefully! We could always do what we did the last time we forgot how to build submarines and simply ask the US how to do it?

jibbit 7y ago

Not sure what you mean by "no one ever talks about it". Which CND meetings have you been to?

lmm 7y ago

> What I find surprising is that nobody ever comments on the fact that the UK literally operates US nuclear missiles with warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs. Huh? That's absolutely a common talking point whenever a conversation about "renewing Trident" or similar comes up.

ggm 7y ago

UK literally operates US nuclear missiles with warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs. The thing being this was a negotiated outcome to prevent the destabilization of a system by the introduction of an independent nuclear source. France was bad enough: the Americans and Russians didn't want Britain making ICBM. (Obviously I doubt the Russians were consulted) This is why black arrow was cancelled: the US promised Polaris if the UK ceased rocket tests in Australia.

NotPaidToPost 7y ago
As a "junior partner" it's good to see that the US allow us a few toys.

chrisseaton 7y ago

> What I find surprising is that nobody ever comments on the fact that the UK literally operates US nuclear missiles with warhead designs heavily influenced by US designs. The fact that they’re US designs was one of the major discussion points of the recent renewal debate - people from across the political spectrum commented on it extensively for months. There are no PALs in order to support a credible threat of retaliation. The UK is small enough that it’s possible that the whole country would have been destroyed by a first strike. This is how nuclear weapons ‘work’ - by credible threat.