MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
With a new Pm, the keys are handed over for the nukes.
4 options if the shit hits the fan . What would you choose ?
1. Retaliate.
2. To do nothing.
3. To place the submarine under the control of an ally - specifically the United States Navy or Royal Australian Navy.
4. To act according to how the Captain deems best.
Do nothing. No point adding to the bodycount, and if it's got to that situation then the deterrent has failed.
none of the above as it depends on what was actually happening, what the strikes where, who by, number of casualties. it would certainly put us at war but the question on if it was a nuclear war is way more complicated than us just hitting the button.
Apparently these are the only 4 options.
Hit the self destruct countdown timer, jump in the escape pod and kiss the pretty girl.
Hack into the attackers computer systems, disarm the missiles etc, set the attackers base to self destruct, win a lengthy fist fight with the top evil henchman then kiss the pretty girl
Rubber B, isn't that similar to the Spies Like Us ending?
May the blessing of the bomb all mighty and the fellowship of the holy fallout descend on this day and forever more.........
A) Retaliate. Just get the place nuked, no one should survive, no one, nothing, nadda, zip, zilch, bugger all.
Then everyone and everything can fight it out once again in another dimension/hell/heaven, wot evz.
Sadly, the conversation here would be less "who do we blow up in retaliation" and more along the lines of...
"Have you got the keys?"
"What keys?"
"The keys to the nuclear red-button thingamabob."
"You had them last."
"Did I?"
"Have you checked the car? Or the front door?"
"Are you sure I had them last?"
"Yes, def-"
If I was the new PM I'd get a preemptive strike in as soon as I got my hands on the button, just to be on the safe side. It would also distract everyone from the Brexit farce.
"Have you got the keys?"
I'm now imagining them getting fished off the hall table through the letterbox of No 10.
It's an option that only the insane would ever consider using first, but by the time you're contemplating retaliation it's far too late.
War between nation states has been curtailed by global trade, you can't kill a terrorist group with a nuke unless you get very lucky and hit the conference centre where all the members are gathered for their annual knees up and even then you'd take out an entire city full of innocents.
Personally, I'd flog the lot back to the Americans and use the billions saved to spend on public services.
Every ex PM who made the contents of their letters known, said "do not retaliate"
I don't get option 3, what's the point of that?
With regards to option 4, why does CFH get to choose??
Well I certainly wouldn't hand over control to the US navy.
Personally though I think it'd let em all fly as far and wide as possible. I'm fairly convinced a near extinction level event would do the planet a favour.
Option 5. Keys go into pot during next G7 summit. Someone gets May. Someone gets Merkle.
The Italians get another Bunga Bunga party.
Depends on how you define 'shit hits the fan'. Normally a phrase used for a work balls up or something similar. I know some work related matters where a nuke would have been a good outcome though. I would hope that generally the thought of retaliation would stop someone in the first place and the chance of some crackpot dictator doing a first strike without any warning whatsoever seems unlikely. Terror attack with dirty bomb seems most likely and all nukes in the world wont stop them. This is an interesting article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12113193/Trident-The-man-with-the-nuclear-button-who-would-fire-Britains-missiles.html
I hope Mrs May has clear handwriting….
Where's the option to stop mankind ever discovering the technology for atomic weapons, let alone being stupid enough to get all reservoir dogs with it.
War between nation states has been curtailed by global trade
Didn't stop WWI.
[img] 
[/img]
Depends on how you define 'shit hits the fan'.
Trump gets elected?
retaliate..wouldn't let those pesky ruskies get away with it.
Personally, I'd flog the lot back to the Americans and use the billions saved to spend on public services.
£2.4 Billion / year. About 1.5% of the total benefits bill.
1) Assuming it's the Russians - Are we saying that they've nuked civilian London, or something like a carrier group?
Something military, then I'd probably retaliate conventionally/low yield nuke (proportional response)
Something civilian, then I'd drop the lot on military infrastructure, maximum yield.
2) Is not a good idea if you want your country / values to survive.
3) & 4) sound like plots from a book.
New York
Washington
Los Angeles
Las Vegas
Berlin
Hamburg
Paris
Paris again, just to make sure
Lyon
Shanghai
Karachi
Delhi
Mumbai
Beijing
Lagos
Istanbul
Jerusalem
Riyadh
Mecca
Baghdad
St Petersburg
Moscow
Sao paolo
Lagos
Tokyo
Jakarta
Seoul
Kinchasa
Cairo
Mexico
Hong Kong
Lima
Bangkok
Bogota
Buenos Aries
Rio
Glasgow,
Edinburgh
And an extra one for Paris
That should spice things up a bit 🙂
ninfan - dont forget to save one for the **** who nearly knocked me off my bike last week!
Put it to a referendum? Then if the answer is the wrong one, hold another until we get the answer STW wants...
Just fit the nukes out with a dead mans hand system, then you can absolve yourself of the moral responsibility of having to press the button as your enemies have done it for you.
jimdubleyou - Member
Personally, I'd flog the lot back to the Americans and use the billions saved to spend on public services.£2.4 Billion / year. About 1.5% of the total benefits bill.
Which includes ALL benefits - child benefit, pensions etc - and still a considerable saving regardless of any rhetoric comparing an outdated immoral piece of equipment (edit) to essential social spending.
Of the four options, 2 is the only sane one. You've lost, you don't have much sovereignty or national identity when everyone except the occupants of one nuclear sub is dead.
1) Assuming it's the Russians - Are we saying that they've nuked civilian London, or something like a carrier group?
If they've nuked one of our carriers, then I daresay retaliating with a tactical nuke would only enrage them a tad and escalate the situation. There have been many studies into how to conduct a "winnable" nuclear war with a superpower, but I daresay ultimately it'll come down to 225 warheads vs several thousand.
If they've nuked London then what's the percentage in retaliating at Moscow? Do you kill millions of civilians who had no choice in the matter out of retaliation? I'm not sure that I'd be capable of doing that.
If the Russians blew the bejesus out of Clacton-On-Sea, it would guarantee at the very least Putin's inclusion on a great many xmas card lists.
6) Replace the nukes with a massive fireworks display - just to see how folk respond when they get the warning...
6) Replace the nukes with a massive fireworks display - just to see how folk respond when they get the warning...
We're still blowing the bejesus out of Clacton on Sea though, right?
New York
Washington
Los Angeles
Las Vegas
Berlin
Hamburg
Paris
Paris again, just to make sure
Lyon
Shanghai
Karachi
Delhi
Mumbai
Beijing
Lagos
Istanbul
Jerusalem
Riyadh
Mecca
Baghdad
St Petersburg
Moscow
Sao paolo
Lagos
Tokyo
Jakarta
Seoul
Kinchasa
Cairo
Mexico
Hong Kong
Lima
Bangkok
Bogota
Buenos Aries
Rio
Glasgow,
Edinburgh
And an extra one for Paris
I'm not sure we have that many warheads TBH, and we may, just, find that we don't actually have the permissions to actually launch them without the Merkans agreeing.
and we may, just, find that we don't actually have the permissions to actually launch them without the Merkans agreeing.
You don't mean to suggest that our independent nuclear deterrent...
.
.
.
Isn't! 😯
I've changed my mind. Assuming it wasn't hit in the first wave, all nuclear missiles are to be targeted on Aylesbury, with any spares left over to be used on Milton Keynes.
Slough isn't spelt 'Aylesbury'...
Actually, fairly sure that I read that British boats have less stringent controls than their American counterparts and that British commanders can pretty much launch them completely independently of any external command network.
Could be wrong though.
"Have you got the keys?
Keys? How quaint. I thought it was a plip.
Perfectly safe. so long as you haven't got it in your pocket when you bend down to tie your shoelaces
I'm not sure we have that many warheads TBH, and we may, just, find that we don't actually have the permissions to actually launch them without the Merkans agreeing.
We do (40 warheads on eight missiles per boat currently deployed, max 120 warheads operationally available total, reduced from max 160 over the past few years)
and yes we can - no permissive action link bollocks here:
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-america-doesnt-control-britains-nuclear-weapons/
Take that France!
retaliate..wouldn't let those pesky ruskies get away with it.
It's not the Russians we really have to worry about; Putin talks big, but he's smart enough to realise just how much he stands to lose.
North Korea, on the other hand...
And before they can get the firing code, turn the keys and press the buttons, they'll have to go ctr/alt/del, turn it off at the wall, wait thirty seconds, turn it back on and wait to reboot...