When Trident was introduced, I was in favour. Unlike some people, I hadn't appreciated the impact that Gorbachev was having on the Cold War, and nor had I properly understood the complete lack of independence that the British deterrent has.
There is precisely one country in the world that Britain might reasonably wish to deter. That's the one and only country that what we laughably call an independent deterrent absolutely cannot be targetted at. (for the hard of thinking: the USA).
Terrorists are not going to be deterred by nukes anyway, and anyone else is going to be far more comprehensively deterred by the 20-odd American Trident subs, and the USAFs' B-52s and then there are ICBMs and probably more nukes I've forgotten.
So why do people want to have a weapon that will neither be useful as a weapon, nor as a deterrent.
And as for the Security Council seat? I'd voluntarily surrender that too, making the Council have 14 member instead of 15.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)