Here’s the source.

https://breakingdefense.com/2019/01/uk-f-35s-clear-ioc-for-land-based-ops-uk-spending-big-on-defense/

The same applies in reverse though. They could glean information about the S-400 and disseminate it among NATO states.

An interesting aside is that Alex Salmond (ex-leader of the SNP) is now hosting a talk show on RT and has recently sued the Scottish taxpayer, yet he was against Brexit. So, which side are the Russian trolls on again?

We never got a choice as to whether or not to enter these arrangements in the first place, so one vote to leave them should be enough.

That said, May should leave, David Davis should take over, and Corbyn should have already been dismissed when his Labour MPs fell below the required support threshold. He has no more of a plan for Brexit than May, he has no plan at all in fact. He can’t be pro-remain because he knows that the majority of Labour constituencies and powerful unions are against it, so he’s just wading in a complete policy vacuum screaming for an election and hoping to win based purely on May’s unpopularity.

No deal is very simple and is the only remaining alternative. What’s needed is a general election on the issue of Brexit alone. No parties, no other issues, just no deal or remain. The vote will be counted by constituency. The representatives for each of the 650 constituencies will then have to support their constituencies wishes in parliament.

Sounds like they got a story of a missile intercept and then applied parts of the brochure specification liberally.

From day 1 she immediately conceded the best cards by agreeing to a a Brexit bill, that should have been withheld until a good deal had been secured. And if the EU refused to negotiate further, fine, accelerate no deal planning and even cut current funding until they came to the table. The EU’s stubbornness and arrogance should have been countered at every stage by making their pockets emptier. Instead she assumed that the EU would respond to ‘good will’ gestures, whereas they actually saw them as a sign of extreme weakness and asked for more.

AK – Why would an approach be made? They already exist and will therefore run to capacity.

I never said comprehensive planning had been carried out, in fact quite the opposite, they should have been preparing for a no deal from day 1 and that has clearly not happened. That said, we are where we are.

Money tied up in assets do not provide liquidity. I suppose you think banks own the buildings they operate out of? In most cases they do not. Most companies subcontract out transport and vehicles too. What assets would you expect them to own?