The only thing that can stop them now is the media, but it really is not their job to be the opposition.
The only thing that can stop them now is the media, but it really is not their job to be the opposition.
Even if the UK could theoretically launch Trident without US authorisation, they wouldn't in practice.
The nukes on the subs can be launched without US approval. As members of NATO we would discuss before firing under most circumstances, but that is a rather different scenario to the "UK requires US authorisation to fire nukes" being implied elsewhere.
When it comes down to brass tacks we have complete operational control of our nukes independently. That in most situations we would discuss with our allies before nuking someone does not mean our nukes are not independent, nor does that we reduce costs by sharing maintenance of nukes not in our subs with the US mean we have lost independence.
So the argument that we do not have independent control of our nukes fails.
So now, after Crimean acquisition, we know that the Russian signature in nuclear treaties is worth nothing.
Furthermore, if Britain did give up Trident they wouldn't be the first nuclear power to give up on nuclear weapons, South Africa did it first.
I'd suggest Japan has the right idea with regards to nuclear weapons... retain the knowledge about how to build nuclear weapons, but don't retain an active stockpile you're not going to use.
What we need is a data disaster. What's the phone number for Anonymous? :)
If you're looking for pushback against Orwellian government over reach you're unlikely to find it there.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interception_Modernisation_P... [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_order