Surprise surprise, it’s a thing I have an opinion on. Great Britain’s Nuclear deterrent programme Trident.
So over the next 30 years, the government is set to spend a staggering £100 billion on renewing our Trident nuclear defence system. Usually I try to paint the arguments of both sides in a fairly equal light but this time I’m set to fail horribly as I’m so strongly set on being anti Trident, but here we go anyway.
Supporters of Trident (including the mainstream political parties of this country) believe that a nuclear deterrent is still an important thing to have to contribute to the security of this country through the Cold War policy of MAD or Mutually Assured Destruction. Essentially, as long as both sides have nuclear arms, neither side will fire upon each other because nobody can possibly win. Thus, as long as we have our nuclear missiles, we are theoretically safe from nuclear war with another nuclear state. There are also around 7000 jobs supported by the ongoing usage of Trident.
Criticisms of Trident include pointing out that renewing it will cost us that crazy £100 billion. All the cuts since the crash in 2008 total approximately £80 billion if you wanted a bit of clarification of what a dent that is on our expenditure as a country. With that money, we could build state of the art medical centres in every city in Britain. We could support 2 million jobs. We could revolutionise our energy collection technology and massively fund renewable energy and the studies into and become independent of foreign oil. a We could go without cuts to any treasured public institution you can think of and make higher education free to whoever wanted it. We could also use the money to take steps to heighten our national security against far more prevalent threats like terrorism, which nuclear arms cannot possibly counter.
There is also the issues with the weapons themselves. They’re illegal for us to actually use, being that the missiles are actually American missiles and we need permission from the United Nations to fire them. And of course firing them is a totally abhorrent act where you are guaranteed to have a ludicrous amount of civilian casualties. 1 innocent civilian is too many. The only country on this Earth that would ever be insane enough to actually use nuclear arms would be North Korea, a country that doesn’t even come to close to having the capability to hitting us and would be wiped off the map by the United States who have a nuclear arsenal at least 10 times our own size. Which brings me to our next point, even those who believe whole heartedly in MAD which is the equivalent of the NRA policy to counter gun crime being to give everyone a gun so everybody is too afraid to shoot each other, our allies also have Nuclear Arms and if they want to spend all their money on war, not their people, that’s their choice.
Just look at countries like Sweden and Denmark. Neither have or want nuclear weapons to protect themselves, they spend their money on their people and thus have some of the best educated citizens, best medical systems and prosperous peoples on this Earth. Seriously, the Nordic countries have got it right.
But I digress, I am seriously opposed to Trident and appear to be in the minority camp here which I feel is a shame. Perhaps one person will read this and agree and that’ll make a difference. I believe the government that shall take power in 2015 will make the decision of whether or not to pursue funding Trident in 2016. Opposition comes from parties like the SNP, Greens, Plaid Cymru, Respect and a handful of Labour MPs if that helps inform your vote this year. As always, feel free to debate me in the comments. Or just talk to me about this, I’d seriously love a little chat if you fancy it. Or not, that’s cool too.