Share.

    10 Comments

    1. The British nuclear deterrent is hardly a deterrent. 4 shitty old subs and shitty old missiles that don’t work.

    2. That’s fair enough.

      They going to help us with the maintenance and cost of maintenance for the weapons and platforms ?

    3. Its strategically fascinating Britain is extending its nuclear umbrella to JEF, and has very interesting implications. JEF is the British led force responsible for northern and artic defence and was set up to operate independently from NATO if needed.

      Firstly Ireland is currently negotiating to join JEF in a lesser capacity, so this will potentially extend Britains nuclear umbrella to Ireland, who are currently uncovered as a non-NATO member.

      Secondarily there is also a clear geopolitical implication that Britain is stating their nuclear umbrella will protect Canada in case of US attack. Canada just applied to join JEF and as a separate organisation this gives the UK a clear nuclear stance on a hypothetical US attack against them, which was more legally unclear in a situation where two NATO members go to war.

    4. Rollover__Hazard on

      Finland and other European states are already under the protection umbrella of British and French nuclear weapons as well the NATO airborne nuclear defence.

      While this commitment is welcomed and should be said out loud to remind the Russians who they’re fucking with, the reality is that neither Britain nor France would tolerate an attack on a NATO ally regardless of what the Americans wanted to do.

    5. This seems good. Would rather we start nuclear proliferation again. The Finnish and other Europeans should have their own. The Ukrainians should have had their own. Sad they had to give them up.