Brits Protesting US Nukes at Lakenheath - Y tho?

  • 🔧 Issue with uploading attachments resolved.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
20221119_133758.jpg

20221119_133756.jpg
Context:
https://www.nuclearinfo.org/article/preparations-for-us-nuclear-weapons-storage-in-uk/

"US budget documents published earlier this year indicate that vaults at RAF Lakenheath are being adapted for possible storage of US nuclear weapons. Under so-called ‘nuclear sharing’ arrangements, a number of NATO countries host nuclear weapons. The weapons remain under the control of US forces. The UK has not hosted US nuclear weapons since 2008. Prior to that US weapons had been continually based in the UK since 1954."
 
Click to expand...
It's just commies and lefties, nothing to be concerned about, they usually purity spiral their way into electoral oblivion whenever they have the chance, but they are very good at protesting.
Not so much at winning public support.
 
Lefty or not, I don't want the UK used as a launch base for American weapons. Our own nuclear weapons under our own launch control? Fine - and that's plenty sufficient to fulfil their ostensible purpose as a deterrent.

US nuclear weapons that they control? That just takes away agency from the UK and makes it more of a target. The USA has been pursuing a doctrine of nuclear primacy for years. And to clarify terms, nuclear primacy means having a first strike capability that knocks out the enemies' ability to retaliate. That's why they want their nuclear weapons in the UK and in Europe. It allows a faster strike time with less response. Something not important if the nuclear weapons are to serve as a deterrent. For that you just need radar stations in order to have enough time to launch your own; and we already provide the USA that.
 
Overly Serious said:
Lefty or not, I don't want the UK used as a launch base for American weapons. Our own nuclear weapons under our own launch control? Fine - and that's plenty sufficient to fulfil their ostensible purpose as a deterrent.

US nuclear weapons that they control? That just takes away agency from the UK and makes it more of a target. The USA has been pursuing a doctrine of nuclear primacy for years. And to clarify terms, nuclear primacy means having a first strike capability that knocks out the enemies' ability to retaliate. That's why they want their nuclear weapons in the UK and in Europe. It allows a faster strike time with less response. Something not important if the nuclear weapons are to serve as a deterrent. For that you just need radar stations in order to have enough time to launch your own; and we already provide the USA that.
Click to expand...
They would be used by US forces within the UK. Britain is basically leasing land for US use. I believe the motivation is to have nukes conveniently located in case we want to nuke Russia.
 
Space_Dandy said:
They would be used by US forces within the UK. Britain is basically leasing land for US use. I believe the motivation is to have nukes conveniently located in case we want to nuke Russia.
Click to expand...
I think you just said what I said, but minus the bit where I said I don't like the US having Britain be its convenient staging point for a nuclear first strike.

EDIT: And to reiterate, I say first strike because this isn't needed for a retaliatory second strike. For that you just need warning to get your missiles in the air. It doesn't matter much where the missiles are, only where your radar is to know they're needed.
 
Overly Serious said:
I think you just said what I said, but minus the bit where I said I don't like the US having Britain be its convenient staging point for a nuclear first strike.

EDIT: And to reiterate, I say first strike because this isn't needed for a retaliatory second strike. For that you just need warning to get your missiles in the air. It doesn't matter much where the missiles are, only where your radar is to know they're needed.
Click to expand...
I'm just clarifying that its not really a loss of US agency. But I agree with everything you said. That's also why I said want to nuke Russia, not need to.

These protesters are hippie liberals who I don't have much in common with politically. However, I wouldn't be happy with a foreign power using us as a nuclear weapon storage facility, and potential launch pad.

My stance on pretty much all foreign policy issues is we/the US needs to mind our own business and stop being the UN's attack dog. Also I hate how we just swoop in and try to manipulate smaller nations for our own purposes, usually under the guise of 'democracy.'
 
Space_Dandy said:
I'm just clarifying that its not really a loss of US agency. But I agree with everything you said. That's also why I said want to nuke Russia, not need to.
Click to expand...
I said it was a loss of UK agency. And I only said "need" in relation to positioning of radar in Europe for early warning for a retaliatory strike, not first strike.

But yes, we seem to be in agreement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom