Letters of Last Resort...

[El_Presidente]

Not too much so historical, but it seems the most fitting forum to place it in. It covers the morality of nuclear weapons use! I was reading through British Nuclear command procedure etc and I happened to come across perhaps one of the most world changing 'letters' I've ever seen:

The letters of last resort are four identically-worded handwritten letters written by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom to the commanding officers of the four British ballistic missile submarines. They contain orders on what action to take in the event that an enemy nuclear strike has destroyed the British state and has killed or incapacitated the Prime Minister and the "second person" (normally a high-ranking member of the Cabinet)

The options the letter can explore are:

retaliate
don't-retaliate
surrender command to Australia or the United States if possible
act on your own judgement

What would you do in this situation? Namely if the letter stated 'act on your own judgement'. Would you retaliate or sail to an allied port? I don't like war and nuclear war is especially horrible, but I find this letter that can only be opened and read in the event of the British state being completely destroyed, incredibly intriguing!

Only David Cameron knows exactly what are on the current letters, what do you think he would do?  I also read some stuff on what previous commanders of the submarines have said, and on a more on topic note, most have said they wouldn't retaliate. Your opinion?

[Nipplestockings]

Well if I was in command in one of those submarines I suppose I would have an entirely different state of mind considering I would never join the military in real life, and I would hope to never find myself in a situation like that.

Anyway, supposing I was the kind of person who would like to join the military and I was considered trustworthy enough by the British state to command one of those submarines, I would probably not retaliate, considering it would not improve the situation and there would be nothing much left for me to do other than make myself useful through other means, such as ferrying supplies or intelligence to the remnants of my state or my allies.

On the other hand, assuming Britain did get destroyed in a nuclear strike I'm pretty sure the rest of the world would be destroyed as well, as nuclear wars are expected to live up to "mutually assured destruction", so it may just be better to lay low for a while and try to save my own crew's ass. It's a difficult question, one can't really say what they'd do in a situation like that.

[El_Presidente]

Interesting approach. In all honesty my mindset would be:

'Those bastards aren't going to get away with murdering millions, retaliate'

But then again, you're right and I know destroying the country that attacked the UK, if they weren't already destroyed, would seem pretty pointless. But in situations as dire as these you can't really afford to hesitate  . So I myself probably wouldn't do anything, possibly just sail to the nearest allied port. The commanders of these submarines I'm fairly sure are also obliged to carry out whatever action is stated by the letter, so if it were retaliate, though probably pointless and difficult would have to be carried through.

[Riddlez]

It's not that nuclear weapons should be viewed as actual warfare weaponry, just a psygological mindfuck, a display of power, etc.

Anyway, Why lower yourself to the level of your enemy.
I'd retailate, but not with nukes, I'd call in the Hit squads, sniper and assassins.

Make it a total mind/clusterfuck.

An Invisible enemy is by far the worst.

[El_Presidente]

It's not that nuclear weapons should be viewed as actual warfare weaponry, just a psygological mindfuck, a display of power, etc.

Anyway, Why lower yourself to the level of your enemy.
I'd retailate, but not with nukes, I'd call in the Hit squads, sniper and assassins.

Make it a total mind/clusterfuck.

An Invisible enemy is by far the worst.

There'd be nothing left of the UK though  . They are called letters of last resort because they are meant to be the last actions of the UK as an independent state.

To be honest though, very few prime ministers seem willing to authorise the use of them. I bet Thatcher would have  . I don't see the point spending billions on them if you're not willing to use them, another budget waste. Once again, I'm not saying they are a good thing at all - far from it - but they seem a bit of a waste I suppose.

[MagicTeatowel]

It seems a bit mean on Canada how there not mentioned as a possible ally D:.

[Norman_the_Owl]

Well, assuming the United Kingdom in it's entirety "Sank", so to speak, I'd probably return the favor

[GoldenEagle]

Retaliate without doubt. They shouldn't get away with bombing your country.

[Menelaos]

Retaliate without doubt. They shouldn't get away with bombing your country.

Two wrongs don't make a right when it comes to human lives in this situation.

[GoldenEagle]

Retaliate without doubt. They shouldn't get away with bombing your country.

Two wrongs don't make a right when it comes to human lives in this situation.

It does.

[Riddlez]

Retaliate without doubt. They shouldn't get away with bombing your country.

Two wrongs don't make a right when it comes to human lives in this situation.

It does.

Let's just all be glad GoldenEagle will probably never be put int othe position.

[MagicTeatowel]

I read the Wikipedia page and it said one of the ways the Sub Commander can check if nukes have hit Britain, is if Radio 4 has stopped transmitting