Comments by "bighand69" (@bighands69) on "Why did Britain develop nuclear weapons?" video.

  1. UK is still a power.
    5
  2. It ensures that the likes of Australia is safe from Russia.
    4
  3. US nuclear weapons were completely built in the US. Very few people had knowledge of them even the generals did not know they existed.
    4
  4. US industry is private meaning they are owned by people. Hence why they sell their products. And the UK got a very special deal out of it. No other country got that deal.
    3
  5. The UK Is very difficult to invade and the only country that could do it would be the US and the US is not going to be invading the UK. The real purpose of the UK having nuclear weapons is to ensure that any country that would intend using them against the UK would get them in return.
    3
  6. Nope. They developed nothing of the sort but were trying to pursue nuclear weapons but their leadership was so clueless that they really never took it seriously.
    2
  7. I think once it was shown that US nuclear weapons secrets had been leaked to the Russians it made sense for the UK to have them or for the US to help them.
    1
  8. The key to nuclear weapons' is not how large the warhead is but how accurate the system of navigation is and how reliable their rocket mechanical technology is. There is no point having a nuclear warhead if it cannot be delivered. There is also the other problem of how good the mechanics of the warheads are. Also it is very complex trying to get a nuclear warhead to actually detonate at ground level and much easier to carry out atmosphere detonation which is nowhere near as effective.
    1
  9.  @kurmis999  The Manhattan project started in 1942 D Day happened in 1944.
    1
  10.  @Dave-hu5hr  The US fought jungle warfare against the Vietcong in Vietnam and killed about 2.5 million with about 30,000 to 50,000 US deaths. The US bloodied them so much that the Vietcong surrendered at the Paris Peace talks. Then the US does what it has done on several occasions it pulls out in a political move even though the battles had been won. Here is the thing the US did not fight total war against the Vietcong.
    1
  11. That is not even close to being true. The Manhattan project was completely a US project.
    1
  12. Nuclear weapons could be neutralized by technology at some point. Who really knows were and what will be developed or may have already been developed.
    1
  13.  @Dave-hu5hr  We have no idea what sorts of atmosphere research has taken place so we just do not know what is possible. A nuclear weapon is a mechanical system and who is to say what sorts of external effects could interfere with that mechanism. Maybe there is some sort of system that could enable an early detonation so that it cannot reach its target. We just do not know is the thing.
    1
  14.  @Anglo_Saxon1  We are assuming that there is no means of defence systems either disrupting the pathway of the missile, interfering with the mechanical control systems of the nuclear detonation or some other really exotic means of interference. Maybe there is some sort of advance laser tracking system that means it can easily be targeted even when it is in orbit. Maybe they use other nuclear weapons to detonate within its path so that they do not need to be super accurate and make a direct hit.
    1
  15. Neil Kinnock that tried to start a union level rebellion was trained in the Karl Marx University. Yet the media would never talk about this.
    1