2013 This report examines the “damage criteria” used by the MOD in planning the UK’s nuclear weapons programme and more recent replacements, and how a desire for particular weapons systems has reshaped the amount of damage considered acceptable. By John Ainslie Download if the embedded viewer has a problem
Tag: US – UK Co-operation
-
Unacceptable Damage
-
Ivo Daalder, ‘Miller consults with allies on nuclear posture review.’
04 September 2009.
-
US Department of Defence, Nuclear Operations and Targeting, ‘Guidance for the sanitization and distribution of information pertaining to nuclear command and control to Supreme HQ Allied Powers Europe.’
12 August 2008.
-
‘Red Snow /W28: A Special Nuclear Relationship, Pages 214 & 215.’
No date.
-
John R. Walker, ‘Extract: British Nuclear Weapons and the Test Ban 1954-1973 Britain, the United States, Weapons Polices and Nuclear Testing: Tensions and Contradictions (Ashgate: Farnham, 2010) John R. Walker pp 325-327.’
03 August 2010.
-
Ainslie notes, US nuclear war planning, ‘Trident Targeting and Fire Control.’
No date.
-
‘British Trident dependence on the US, Submarine communications, VLF and LF.’
No date.
-
Serco Rakmulti, Royal Navy projects
No date.
-
Ainslie Notes, Progress with the UK’s Future Nuclear weapons Programme
No date.
-
UK Weapon Training System, Training Implementation Plan Future Hull, General Dynamics
28 May 2008.
-
John Ainslie, ‘Notes: Replacing Trident.’
No date.
-
The White House, Tony Blair, George W Bush, ‘Modernizing Trident’
07 December 2006.
