Refried Boogaloo: Trump Just... Sucks

Plus the British no longer have the naval air component of nuclear deterrence, as they abandoned it. That was probably a stupid thing to do.

 

I believe Tornado's could also be used for it?

 

Yes, but it saved a few quid at the time, and that's all that seems to matter here.

 

How long before someone tells Trump about the Falkland Islands and how great it would be if the US owned that, too?

 

I have no clue. I suppose they did in the past.

 

I did some reading on that a while back and my understanding is that, while long term, (so, several years), withdrawal of support would impact its use, in the short term, it wouldn't make any difference.

 

Not sure what that means? Do you mean planes taking off from ships?

We have subs which are part of the navy.

Surely, planes taking off from ships would be the first to be hit.

 

Planes carrying nukes.

 

The British system relies on permanently at-sea subs but, as you say, it depends who we think we want to hit.

Even in the most extreme situation I don't think we're talking about being attacked BY the USA, are we? We're talking about having an independent deterrent that doesn't rely on the US or anyone else in the long term.

That can't be done in the short term, but if we never start, it will NEVER be achieved.

In military terms, I'd suggest some sort of joint venture based on an upgrade to the British and French systems. The problem there is political control.

In a sense, it's precisely the ambiguity of the current situation that's its main advantage, as no aggressor could be certain HOW the people with nuclear weapons would react in different circumstances.

This is the 'nuclear tripwire' theory of deterrence. Nobody wants to find out what will happen, as the only way to do so is by launching nuclear weapons to find out.

 

Yes, from landbases or from an aircraft carreer. That's what I meant.

 

A submarine launching its missiles leaves no doubt as to its intentions: to trigger Armageddon. The airborne component is potentially more precise and flexible. It can be used for demonstration exercises in a crisis, integral parts of the deterrent maneuver (this was done in the days following Russia's attack on Ukraine in February 2022, through an air exercise with Rafales simulating a nuclear raid). It can also deliver a single, non-repeatable nuclear warning to restore deterrence (following France's nuclear doctrine).

 

Whenever I see Will Somers pop up, I grab the popcorn and dive in.

 

David Bowie was right.

 

I suspect that a 2 party system is much more vulnerable to an authoritarian takeover than a 3 party system. If Labour goes nuts, Naughtius doesn’t have to vote Conservative, he can vote Liberal.

Here, if a Republican doesn’t like Trump, he has no voting option except Democrats.

 

Trump is such a moron he even made the right wingers of Europe be against him

Because as a right winger you can't go yeah lets let do Trump do whatever then declare I am proud nationalist. Even they see they would look like utter wankers

 

Coalition governments also are less inclined to prop up a nutcase leader. At least one of the parties would pull the plug, potentially it would be a rush to be the first to jump ship, as it can be an electoral boon. Don't want to be the last one standing when the music stops.

 

What you are describing is the fact that Trump is deeply unpopular across the political spectrum. Even many Europeans seduced by populist parties here deeply dislike him.
It's why Marine Le Pen had to distance herself from him during the most recent Presidential elections.

 

I think Riggleman was run out of the party for officiating a gay wedding.

At least that’s how I remember it.

if I’m right, will you adjust your views?

 

Man does not want to live in the world he helped create. People like Dan Hannan are beneath my contempt. My respect for pure pond scum like Nigel Farage is higher than for Hannan's ilk.

 

Neil is another one of those cretins.

 

Wonder how TrumpCo is commemorating MLK Jr Day?