Re: Spexit!
What military actions exactly in today’s world would be “Suez-like?”. Almost all of the UK’s recent wars have been multilateralist. Those that are not (e.g. Falkands) are likely not supported with the required precision by Galileo, because there isn’t a high-rising MEO over that location.
Very importantly, in the case of Falkands, let’s not forget that it was France that refused to give us the Exocet codes to allow us to defend ourselves. Or, let’s take a minor civil war like the Northern Ireland conflict. Are you sure that the EU would support the use of munitions like GNSS guided mortar fire to take out an IRA position? 100% sure? Galileo absolutely doesn’t retire political risk. Most realistic scenarios are very problematic when stated explicitly.
4) To support an independent nuclear deterrent. *Yes, exactly that*. So, let’s have that debate.
It isn’t the US intervening on our behalf, it is whether they would actively prevent our own capability.
If instead of people being told “Brexit bad because no Galileo”, this were phrased as
“A key benefit of Remain is to allow us a policy to launch nuclear weapons even if the United States disagrees” most Remainers, being liberal multilateralist, would be *horrified* that this was what they had been voting in favour of.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
