Should we replace Trident

[kwicky]

Today Tony Blair is going to say that Britain's nuclear deterrent will be updated at a cost of �30-40 billion pounds. Just like the Iraq issue he will bludgeon his own MPs into accepting it. The tories in classical style know of no alternative as that put forward by the USA so a vote in the commons is a done deal.

SHOULD THE BRITISH PUBLIC BE GIVEN A REFERENDUM ON THIS ISSUE.

Probably no one would disagree to keeping our existing nuclear system but should we engage in another arms race ,for lets face it, to go ahead with this upgrade will only encourage other states to do so. ie Russia, China etc.

[whiffey]

How about if he drops the warhead total from 200 down to 100 and the number of submarines from 4 to 3 ? Is that more acceptable ? Surely the thought of completely disarming is ridiculous, there won't be any bludgeoning going on. No referendum on this, just as no referendum on capital punishment. None of us knows the nuances of international politics and should leave the decision-making to those who do.

[matt66]

And where are these trident missiles going to be based. In scotland. have they asked the scottish people if they would like nuclear weapons in their rivers. Why not base it under the Thames in London. oh no its too close to home.....let the scots get it. Besides there wont be any more jobs created in Scotland, the Trident is being built in some other country.

For a party that professes to be so concerned about the environment that it proposes to raise every possible tax to save the planet, is now proposing to built the something that will kill every living being on this planet.

Only in Blairs govt. Only Blair can get away with this logic.

[matt66]

An excerpt from a fantastic article...shame that Blair does not read this writers articles...he never does .....

The first thing to say about the replacement for our existing Trident defence system is that Tony Blair�s claim that it has to be decided this winter, before he goes, is ludicrous. You know that. The defence White Paper, which he will unveil on Monday, is all about cutting a dash as he departs and sucking up to an arms industry at present in a state of hyperventilation.
The second thing to say is that the price tag he will quote at the dispatch box will be purely notional: plucked from the air and doomed to prove a grotesque underestimate. You know that, too.

The third is that almost nobody really, really thinks we need it. If you are honest with yourself, you know that as well.

read the full article here at

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1065-2 482607,00.html

[Dom Tuk]

remember Tony Blair started his career as a CND activist !!!!!. Surprised, but then nothing should surprise you about this liar.

remember his inaugural speech he stated that he will never fight a war.

His legacy, which he so desparately seeks, is in his name. BLIAR.

[jake-the-peg]

I've said it before but I think it's worth repeating.

Huge expensive pointless submerines are not the only nuclear option.

Getting rid of Trident does not mean nuclear disarmament.

If there were an effective opposition it might help.

But alas it seems photo opportunities with windmills is more up Cameron's street.

It looks though as if he may have to come up with a policy though because 63 labour MP's have signed a motion calling on Trident not to be replaced.

I don't think they'll be able to bludgeon this one!

Therefore Blair will almost certainly need Cameron to get it through.

I think this'll be Dave the Chameleon's first real test.

[noxlumos]

I'm a lifelong labour voter but this Govt has cured me of that.
Why do we have to go down this sorry path just to indulge that smirking muppet's ego? I hope once and for all the real people that are left within the labour party stand up to the idiot on this.All we need now is another bloody arms race on top of the disasters he's already brought.

[Dom Tuk]

Nox...i take it you mean that you were a life long SDLP voter (the equivalent to labour in NI). But there is hardly any comparison is there. For one voting is divided along sectarian lines in NI and catholics favoured SDLP (which under the stewardship of John Hume was the best there was in NI). or did you also vote labour in england??

very off topic i know but question directed only at Nox.

[johnlambert]

Dom?
Why do you assume that Nox supported SDLP? is it because he is an Irish catholic? never assume anything my friend
Noxy sorry if that sounded patronising, I know you can defend yourself, couldnt help jumping in there
Regards

[Dom Tuk]

No No there is nothing to defend. I would support John Humes party any day. It was a question out of curiosity.

[johnlambert]

Anyway, back to the question
Trident is the UK's independant nuclear deterant, or is it? before we can fire the missiles in anger, we need to ask the permission of the USA, where is the independance in that?
Yes I think we should be given a referendum on the issue, also lets have referendums on;
1) Capital punishment
2) Membership of europe

[Gromit]

Not sure who these expensive toys are to be aimed at? We are fighting two wars at the moment and their use is absolutely zilch. Their use can only be as a deterant to other Nuclear Powers.

[johnlambert]

Like North Korea, Iran and all the other unstable lunatic countries that want do destroy western civilisation gromit?

[Gromit]

Iran is many years away from producing a bomb. US or Israel will deal with them. US ditto NK.

Expensive and useless.

[noxlumos]

To answer Dom I'm actually a Sinn Fein supporter but have been Labour follower in England and have always considered, that since the Govt of England has such an enormous effect on NI, that Labour represented more what I considered best for NI. I've been here a long time now and here have supported Labour for those reasons, plus I'm essentially a socialist idealist, however labour have been a massive disappointment as a Govt, with perhaps the exception of it's handling of NI.Still not enough to make me ever vote for them again though.

[jake-the-peg]

That's the problem john

There are so many lunatic countries and none of them are going to attack us with an ICBM!

How has the US's nuclear arsenal helped them in Iraq or Afghanistan?

It certainly didn't deter the 9/11 or 7/7 bombers!

Even if you can think of a scenario where we'd use nuclear weapons - why do they need to lurk at the bottom of the ocean in hugely expensive subs?

Is Al Qaeda going to launch a first strike against UK RAF bases?

The more you think about it the less sense submarine launched ICBMs make

[LazyGun]

I think the existing system has its supporters mostly amongst those who have jobs because of it, the service whose remit it is (Navy), and amongst some politicians who believe having an "independent" nuclear deterrent allows us to "punch above our weight" in international circles.

Having such a deterrent seems to aid us little in todays environment however... we should just let the existing system come to the end of its useful life, and spend some of the money earmarked for a replacement on beefing up our conventional armed forces and intelligence services.

[anotheoldgit]

Let the British show the rest of the world that we can once again be a leader, we took the lead in banning slavery, now lets take the lead and ban our nuclear weapons.

We could then be a world leader negotiating with other countries to give up their WOMD, in the knowledge that we are not producing any ourselves while asking others to give them up.

Perhaps then we may have gone a long way towards passing on a safer world to our future generations.

[LazyGun]

Wow a post from anotheoldgit that I can actually agree with :)

[kwicky]

Things I have learnt today:

1. that the firing of Trident is indeed independent.
2. that the decision rests solely on the Prime Minister and his judgement.

I think we can safely sleep in our beds from now on!

[jake-the-peg]

What? you mean like the involvement of our troops in Suez was independant until the US threatened to sell all their stocks of stirling unless we toed the line?