@FudgeTosser@archeohistories Al-Qaeda were based in Afghanistan.
NATO Article 5 was invoked by the US, so we all came to your aid.
They're called Afghans, not Afghanis.
You people are insufferable.
Carol Vorderman has a blocked toilet and calls for a plumber to come and unblock it. The plumber is Reform UK’s Robert Kenyon who quickly identifies the cause of the issue, but it’s no easy task.
{satire}
@martiniotero@TheAngry53586@ShipWrektPod It is brilliant that in this mad world of today and 44 years after this war, there are people on both sides who can speak rationally, truthfully and respectfully with each other. X is missing a lot of this sort of behaviour, BZ to you all. Faith in humanity slightly restored!
@ArnoldLabour@geoallison I suspect these things will be kept under wraps, by their very nature. I'll be honest, I'm OK with that and trust the submarine community to not hamstring themselves!
@ArnoldLabour@geoallison I feel you, and completely understand. I'm not expert but I'd say that we wouldn't tie ourselves into a system that reduces our ability to act independently. Strategically it makes no sense, and from a structural point of view it would require sweeping changes to infrastructure
@ArnoldLabour@geoallison That assumption is incorrect. Trump vetoing is moot; we can fire them unilaterally, they're in our full control. Just because he doesn't like it doesn't stop us using them, technically or ethically.
@ArnoldLabour@geoallison That's fine, he can veto away. In that scenario Article 5 would be invoked, and we'd have plenty of support from other NATO nations. It wouldn't be a case of a knee jerk reaction, the fallout (pun sort of intended 😂) would need to be carefully managed. JEF+ would be key to that
@ArnoldLabour@geoallison I suppose it needs to be looked at with the bigger picture in mind. If we were to use strategic nuclear weapons, it would have global consequences. It would only likely be done in the context of a conflict / war where NATO is involved, so it would be done with allies in mind
@ArnoldLabour@geoallison Indeed, but that's a very simplistic comparison between very different technologies. We don't just buy these things off the shelf, the requirements for governance are built into the system so that things like that aren't possible. It is a joint venture, but that side is sovereign
@ArnoldLabour@geoallison Given that the governance of strategic weapons requires a lengthy and intricate approval and operational chain to safely and legally assure them, I'd say it's highly likely that the Trident replacement will be operated quite similarly to the current system.