About Us

[email protected]

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Roger Hayter wrote:
Rambo wrote:

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 21:34:07 -0000, wrote:

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Roger Hayter wrote:
wrote:

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Rambo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

As well as the Brits.

The UK nuclear weapons are firmly under the control of the Americans
anyway, so I don't think we have them for other than ceremonial and
solidarity reasons. They're not cheap either.

So if the UK were nuked, there would be no retaliation until the US
allowed it?

The NATO treaty suggests that USA would have to retaliate also.

Isn't that a treaty obligation rather than an automatic military action
though, so the US government would have to decide?

The relation between the US and UK is so close the UK would have to do
something extremely stupid that caused it to get nuked before the US
would do anything other than immediate retaliation.

--
Jim Pennino

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Menu

About Us