Maybe because it’s the second decade of the Twenty-First Century and the tech should be much more advanced than 100 years-old balloons. It doesn’t provide confidence.
It’s the third decade of the twenty first century.
To me this tech sounds perfectly sensible. I don’t get the obsession with spending extra to make a product worse.
You are right: third decade! I’m so behind the times. I hear that the army’s going to start using bows and arrows as there’s nothing like saving a bit of cash. All does the same job in the end, I suppose.
It is British policy to use Trident as a second-strike weapon. Advanced technology would have limited use in such a scenario. That’s why nuclear warfare relies on the simplest fallbacks possible.
Maybe because it’s the second decade of the Twenty-First Century and the tech should be much more advanced than 100 years-old balloons. It doesn’t provide confidence.
It’s the third decade of the twenty first century. To me this tech sounds perfectly sensible. I don’t get the obsession with spending extra to make a product worse.
You are right: third decade! I’m so behind the times. I hear that the army’s going to start using bows and arrows as there’s nothing like saving a bit of cash. All does the same job in the end, I suppose.
What does being old technology make it bad. If it works, then KISS is perfectly valid.
It is British policy to use Trident as a second-strike weapon. Advanced technology would have limited use in such a scenario. That’s why nuclear warfare relies on the simplest fallbacks possible.
Oh boy, I read that as “British police use Trident as a second-strike weapon” and thought “you better comply when they tase you or else.”