Share.

18 Comments

  1. BristolShambler on

    We want to diversify our nuclear deterrent, but *still* be reliant on the Americans? Do they watch the news?

  2. Unhappy-Preference66 on

    Insane we’d buy American products when they are acting like they are. We might be using them on them.

  3. Life-Bedroom-8886 on

    Excellent. Nothing quite like breaching the terms of NNPT to demonstrate your resolve to strive for peace. 

    There are NO circumstances under which nuclear weapons can be used which complies with IHL/LOAC.

    Why would any nation that is peaceable decide to increase its capacity to launch unlawful WMD?

    If true, this government is as morally bankrupt as the last. 

  4. I’m glad we’re returning to a two-pronged deterrent as we used to have before the WE.177s were retired in the 90s, but the thought of buying _American_ in the current circumstances is absurd! 😳

  5. YourBestDream4752 on

    I hope we get enough As to make the Bs navy-only, it’s pretty embarrassing to have to share them.

  6. super_sammie on

    The thing that always sticks in my mind is….

    Do we not think the RAF can already deliver nuclear strikes?

    The official secrets act is there for a reason. Who really knows what power we have.

    There’s a reason a small island off the coast of Europe isn’t a colony of somewhere.

  7. Get rid of the lot, it’s a stupid game with no winner. There’s better places to spend our money

  8. “capable of carrying” is not the same as “to carry”. The Times is shit as usual.

  9. So we’re going back to the 60’s/70’s then? When we had Vulcans, Victors, & Buccaneers.

  10. InanimateAutomaton on

    This is genuinely good stuff. I’d prefer we developed our own air dropped nuclear capability, but that would probably require us to overhaul typhoon or similar.

  11. Headline: British fighter jets to carry nuclear bombs

    Story: Britain **wants to purchase** fighter jets **capable of firing** tactical nuclear weapons

    Has headline writing got even more egregious recently or is it just me

  12. MimesAreShite on

    spending all our money pretending to be a serious international force instead of fixing our domestic problems, what a vain embarrassing country

  13. This is a good move. We’ve had more trident launch test failures than the military would like in recent years so a secondary delivery method is a welcome one.

  14. Can anyone explain why carrying a nuclear weapon on a plane that might crash by accident is a good idea? Has to be more unsafe than subs or ships right?

  15. iuseemojionreddit on

    How delightfully reassuring. So glad our taxes go on the ability to start the apocalypse.

  16. Greatbigcrabupmyarse on

    I would prefer that our fighter planes concentrated on engaging other aircraft and left the delivery of ordnance to those who specialise in it.

    However the Sunday Times is edited by utter buffoons, so it should be expected they’ll completely fuck up a simple press release.