In message
"Clive Coleman." wrote:

In message , Graeme Wall
writes
Americans might not retaliate but pull back into their isolationist mode.
Hence the perceived need for a British independant nuclear strike
capability.
That's why we've got Trident? We don't have any nuclear capability not
controlled by the Merkins, even Trident requires their permission before
it can be used. The excuse being that when it was sold to us, the cost
would have been double but Merka would share development costs with us
as long as they retained right of veto, which I understand is a twin key
approach, neither can fire it without the express permission of the
other. What good is that to us. Remember Suez, it was the Merkins that
buggered that up, so much for special relationships.

I should have put independent in inverted commas... and spelt it correctly
:-)

Actually we were more independent then, our nuclear deterrent was free-fall
bombs carried by the V-bomber force which the Americans had no practical
control over. As for the SLBMS I'm not sure the Americans can physically
prevent us launching them, we sure as hell can't stop them launching theirs.
The only way a genuine twin key approach can work is if RN boats carry USN
personnel on every deployment and I'm not aware that that is the case.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html