Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,789
Yes. MAD works.
What a horribly dangerous world you want to live in then. As has been said, they can't be uninvited. Complete disarmament would be incredibly dangerous.
Why? Warfare is becoming more asymmetric, it's more likely that any use of nuclear material is going to come from a terrorist group rather than a nation state.
Yes....because of nuclear weapons.
I don't think nukes are the primary or even a particularly noteworthy contributing factor to that. Globalisation is probably the single most important factor in that.
Chance of Scots going independent.Scot here, don't see the need to move it out of Scotland tbh. Regardless of where it goes there will be protestors and the waters around Scotland are ideal.
I'd renew it.
Personally, I'd vote not to renew. A completely useless boondoggle that has no beneficial effect for the UK, and will never, ever be launched.
However, as a politician, I'd vote to renew: it's simply not worth the political cost of cancelling Trident for the meaningless difference that a weapon we're never, ever going to launch will make. Think of it as an over-priced employment scheme for Scotland.
Or, if we're allowed a more nuanced response than yes/no: we should probably compromise on a less costly nuclear defence scheme. There is utterly no need to maintain a constantly active nuclear "deterrent" in the current world so there should be room to reduce the scale and cost of our system.
However, what will happen is that Trident renewal gets voted through.
How you can think that is truly beyond me.
In the meantime, what do over half the UK population think about unions with other countries and increased globalisation?...
That's all confused stuff, and is indicative of the current Labour leadership's position. No political party will win over floating voters if they blow hot and cold on defence. You make noises against a nuclear deterrent, then noises in favour of a nuclear deterrent, then suppose there is some space between yes and no, into which you jump feet first.
The obvious answer is that Trident should be renewed. Think of nuclear weapons as a good insurance system. No one worth their salts would advocate we do away with insurance, would they?
Renew, no brainer without the fear of our Nuclear deterrent whats to stop people attacking us.
So let's follow this logic and see where it goes.
In the not so distant future, a tyrannical and out of control China launches a pre-emptive strike against the UK...
What attacks are you expecting that require a nuclear arsenal ? Nuke don't work against groups like ISIS, Al Qaeda or the Taliban, so unless Putin is aout to go full retard and decide to create the set for Fallout 5 across Europe I think this whole notion of we need them as a deterrent is a red herring. We need them so the government can keep a rake load of people in Jobs.
If Putin was about to go full retard then our nuclear deterrent would have failed. The whole idea is to contain things like that before they get to the point someone goes full retard.