Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius
They will not be needed if clegg has his way as we will not have any  |
As I & others posted earlier, more than once, Clegg did *not* say that a Lib Dem Government would scrap the UK's nuclear deterrent. He said that they say no to a like-for-like Trident replacement.
http://www.libdems.org.uk/defence.aspx
http://www.libdems.org.uk/siteFiles/...%20Defence.pdf
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lib Dem's on Defence
No to like-for-like Trident.
Full-scale Trident is a Cold War system intended for a by-gone age. It is unnecessary and, at £100bn over a lifetime, it is unaffordable. We will hold a full defence review to establish the best alternative for Britain’s future security.
|
http://network.libdems.org.uk/manife...festo_2010.pdf
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lib Dem Manifesto
• Saying no to the like-for-like replacement of the Trident nuclear
weapons system, which could cost £100 billion. We will hold a full
defence review to establish the best alternative for Britain’s future
security.
|
I'll also repost an earlier reply I made to you:
Given the state of the economy, & given the kind of cuts needed, is it *really* worth spending that much money on a full like-for-like replacement of Trident? [Note that they
haven't said "We will completely & utterly scrap the UK's nuclear deterrent".]
And besides... Who would nuke us? Seriously? Surely the biggest nuclear threat against us at the moment is the threat of a terrorist nuclear attack, rather than an attack by a nation? You can't nuke terrorists in retaliation...
But if we were nuked, and we did not have our own nuclear deterrent anymore whatsoever (
which isn't what is actually being proposed), then as we are a member of NATO & an ally of the US, the US would retaliate for us, as an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all.
------
So even if we had none, there is still a deterrent, as the US has them, as France has them. An attack on one NATO member = an attack on NATO = NATO retaliation.
Canada, Germany, etc. make do without them. Why do we need them? It is not the Cold War anymore. Would Iran or N. Korea really attack us? Why? If they did, they'd get nuked in response (by us if we still have nukes, by the US if we didn't). I think nuclear terrorism is a greater threat myself, & what use is an SLBM against a terror attack?
But, saying all that... as I said earlier: The Lib Dems are not proposing scrapping the UK's Nuclear Deterrent, they are not proposing unilateral nuclear disarmament, etc...