I’m on record as being opposed to Trident. The Compass report “In place of cuts” which I co-authored does, for example, call for it to be scrapped.
There’s good reason why I don’t trust leaders who support Trident.
Launching Trident would for all practical purposes quite probably presage the end of life on earth as we know it. That’s the inevitable consequebce of nuclear war: mutually assured destruction (MAD).
To be willing to launch Trident you would, therefore, have to be insane, suicidal or a psychopath.
I don’t want such people as my prime minister.
And to say you want it but won’t use it suggests a complete lack of judgement or that you’re a liar.
And I don’t want either such characteristics in a leader.
Which means there is only one tenable and consistent sane position with regard to Trident — which is to scrap it.
Which also happens to help close the fiscal deficit.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
It would be stupid to scrap it in such an unstable world. £100bn over 25 years is about £4bn a year.
You miss the point, as ever. The whole idea is that it is a deterrent. There is no intention to use it.
I don’t think anyone has said that they want it but won’t use it. Perhaps you could point us to someone who has? That would defeat the purpose of it.
Remember, the only time a nuclear weapon has ever been dropped in anger was when only one country had it. That’s how succesful the MAD doctrine has been.
@Peter
You say:
“I don’t think anyone has said that they want it but won’t use it.”
But then in the line above say
“The whole idea is that it is a deterrent. There is no intention to use it.”
Which means you’ve just said you want it but won’t use it.
You’re not too good at this arguing thing, are you?
You’ve missed it again.
There is no intention to use Trident – it will be only be used if someone else does.
I have no intention of beating up someone in the street but if someone tries to attack me I’ll sure as hell defend myself.
@Peter
In which case you’ll be prosecuted
And in the case of Trident we can still, as I said, say goodbye to it all
I get it all right
You’re mad
MAD – Mutually Assured Destruction – comes from the same Cold War train of thought as “game theory” as promulgated by John Nash, best exemplified by his “Fuck You Buddy” game.
Of course, John Nash was also suffering from severe, undiagnosed, paranoid schizophrenia at the time…