Nukes

So, today I read that the UK Labour party is just as keen as the Conservative party in retaining nuclear weapons.

Really. And I asked myself.... what for?

The whole thing is eerily reminiscent of the gun control debate in the US. The basic function of a gun is to fire bullets, but people more often justify liberal (as opposed to liberal inspired) gun laws in terms of personal protection by referencing deterrence. Like, 'I won't really shoot anyone, coz they won't mug me as soon as they see I have a gun'.

So it is with Britain and nuclear weapons. We don't talk about how many nuclear missiles we have. How many cities we could blow up or anything like that. We talk about an 'independent nuclear deterrent'. Which kind of assumes there are countries which might invade us if we didn't have some of our own nukes.

I am wondering, which countries are these?

Also, different commentators have different stories. How independent is this system? Could it be fired without America's consent? If so, could they disable the guidance system?

Other people say we really need some big nuke bombs to retain our seat at the top table.

They mean our place amongst permanent members of the UN security council.

But no one ever listens to Britain any more. Apparently we can't afford to pay tuition fees for our young people in university. If that is the case, and we all know 'tough' decisions are essential, how can we possibly afford nuclear weapons?

This is not for the benefit of the people of Britain. Al Qaeda won't suddenly love us if we aren't nuclear.

This is for the vanity of the politicians.

I will never vote for any party that renews the UK nuclear armoury.