Should Trident Be Scrapped?

[edgray]

It's up for debate again: should Britain's nuclear deterrent, Trident, which costs the country billions of pounds to keep in service, be scrapped?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/20/trident-submarine-coalition-government-scrap

Your thoughts, please.

 

[Meirionnydd]

It's up for debate again: should Britain's nuclear deterrent, Trident, which costs the country billions of pounds to keep in service, be scrapped?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/20/trident-submarine-coalition-government-scrap

Your thoughts, please.

Well, considering I'm foreign, it's not really my place to make an opinion here, but I don't think it's needed. At least when the UK has a massive budget deficit, where the money could be used elsewhere.

Plus, we're not really living in the Cold War anymore, it's kind of redundant to still hold on to a large stockpile of nuclear weapons.

 

[edgray]

Well, considering I'm foreign, it's not really my place to make an opinion here, but I don't think it's needed. At least when the UK has a massive budget deficit, where the money could be used elsewhere.

Plus, we're not really living in the Cold War anymore, it's kind of redundant to still hold on to a large stockpile of nuclear weapons.

I think that nuclear weapons are everyone's business seeing how dangerous they are, so your voice is equally as important.

 

[Peter Parka]

No, definately not! Countries like N Korea and Iran getting hold of nukes are far more of a threat to us than Russia having them during the cold war. Also worth mentioning that the only country who has ever used them on another nation is still in possession of them.

 

[Zorak]

Never.

It's impossible to think that if Britain wants to be considered a major player, it can do so without Nuclear deterrant.

We are in fact, very lucky to live on such a small island, and can keep our nuclear arms off shore and on the move.

This has a number of benefits:
a) Very hard for another nation to destroy our stockpuile (Which is the goal of nuclear warfare, which most people don't know)
b) safety
c) increased effective range
d) acts as a superior deterrent than that of a number of stationary nuclear silo's

 

[porterjack]

i am foreign

 

[edgray]

No, definately not! Countries like N Korea and Iran getting hold of nukes are far more of a threat to us than Russia having them during the cold war. Also worth mentioning that the only country who has ever used them on another nation is still in possession of them.

It should be pointed out as well that they haven't been used in well over half a century. For good reason. No one dares.

I didn't realise North Korea was such a threat to the UK, nor Iran for that matter...

Never.

It's impossible to think that if Britain wants to be considered a major player, it can do so without Nuclear deterrant.

We are in fact, very lucky to live on such a small island, and can keep our nuclear arms off shore and on the move.

This has a number of benefits:
a) Very hard for another nation to destroy our stockpuile (Which is the goal of nuclear warfare, which most people don't know)
b) safety
c) increased effective range
d) acts as a superior deterrent than that of a number of stationary nuclear silo's

I agree the system is a good system, but is it necessary? and is it worth the enormous amounts of money?

And given that there hasn't been a successful invasion of Britain for several centuries, what's the justification?

i am foreign

Nevermind, you can't help it

 

[porterjack]

Nevermind, you can't help it

that is soo English

 

[Zorak]

I agree the system is a good system, but is it necessary? and is it worth the enormous amounts of money?

And given that there hasn't been a successful invasion of Britain for several centuries, what's the justification?

I think the relative security that Trident provides not only now, but in an uncertain future (you only need to check todays news to see North Korea up to their old tricks) also, is worth the expense.

I can completely understand the arguement against it, but I don't think National Nuclear Security is something that should be compromised by any responsible leader, just to ease the financial burden or appease a few hippies. (That's a slight directed straight at Mr Clegg)

 

[Dana]

I thought this was about Trident Chewing Gum.

 

[hart]

I thought this was about Trident Chewing Gum.

:24:

Oh Dana...........

 

[Dana]

:24:

Oh Dana...........

:ninja seriously though i think anything nuclear should be scrapped.

 

[dt3]

I thought this was about Trident Chewing Gum.

I thought this reply was from Jessica.