Jacko,
While you make some very fair points as ever, I don't think there is anything wrong with the statement that you quoted from me. So what if the "clever bits" are American? I would say that, for once, that was a sensible piece of procurement. We still have a lot of experience of the system wherever it was built.
SACEUR was indeed responsible, during the Cold War at any rate (I can't honestly say if this is still the case), for NATO-wide targetting policy. Which makes perfect sense - there's no point everyone hitting the same targets all at once. OPCON was given to SACLANT, which again makes perfect sense. But what you don't mention is that neither of these authorities had any control should an independent launch be required that didn't involve other NATO countries. Furthermore, the autonomy of the system is guaranteed by the absence of interlocks fitted to the Ohio boats and their missiles. UK Commanders can independently launch if the circumstances arise although US Commanders cannot. American permission is absolutely not necessary and neither is the GPS system as the urban legend would have us believe.
Blue Steel - It may have had a good INS (but then again is high accuracy that important in a nuclear weapon?), but it was completely vulnerable to SAMs even during the 1960s. The V-bomber had to get within something like 150nm of the target. I'd hardly call that stand-off!