tory mp burk is threatening me with psychiatric treatment as she guns for my footage ...
she sure as hell aint getting anywhere with out it ...
and she will be doubly vacuous and icy with it ....
Fomalhaut88
1 November 2012 12:34AM
PaxGrass :
No, you are conflating the SNP with CND. CND have an excellent understanding of Trident. The SNP membership don't, despite having a CND group within them, for most SNP members it is an ancillary issue to independence so they've not taken the time to learn the details. Plus, you are conflating pro-independence posters with SNP members. For instance I'm a pro-independence Scot who'll be voting no in 2014 because I feel the SNP are no longer credibly committed to opposing Trident
Tell me, does your "excellent understanding of Trident" include the idea that it needs GPS to make it work?
Does that "understanding" extend to the idea that it needs an enabling call from Washington to make it work?????
That SNP/CND supporter Kristine Kochanski truly does need your "excellent understanding".
Please do enlighten her, will you.
LastClassWarrior :
Multiply so. The warheads themselves are secured by Permissive Action Linkages (PALs) whose codes can only be released by the highest level of the US politco-military command (the President if alive and in contact, then the Vice President and then the Speaker of the House). No PAL, no mushroom cloud. We cannot make "our" warheads explode without direct, real-time authorisation from the US. (So much for the 'independent deterrent'). Also, the missiles are guided using the Global Positioning System, which is US-owned and operated and can be denied by them to any user or system at will - the 'Selective Availability' has always been a feature of the system, so that users dependent on GPS can be denied it at American whim. So, not only are the missiles dead weight without US authorisation, but we can only guide them to their targets with US connivance - which can be withdrawn at a moment's notice. Finally, the submarines themselves are hopelessly compromised, easily tracked by the US, the French and the Russians (at least) due to design flaws that make them much noisier than their foreign equivalents. How did that happen? Their nuclear propulsion is a US design, supplied to us as a "gift" - of course it's a noisy, obvious disaster that makes our submarines all but useless compared to the US. Why was this never spotted? Because in the US their nuclear propulsion was at least run by engineers, while in the UK it was the province of PPE graduates and naval officers with more gold stripes than brain cells who were grateful for an apparently-working reactor design and had no skills to spot the disastrous designed-in faults. In the Cold War days this was just about tolerable since the Soviets were much less capable even than our pathetic submarines, but the reality today is that in any time of real threat or tension our submarines would be easily sunk within hours
You are not the last class warrior. there are plenty more out there that will be pedalling this drivel.
Trident nuclear warheads need GPS, do they????
So all an enemy has to do is knock out the GPS network and none of the UK or US nuclear missiles will work?
Is that the quality of your debate?????????
So tell me, how did the previous Polaris system get by without GPS?
Please do explain.
