Thursday, 1 October 2015
Mr Jeremy Corbyn and the Nuclear Deterrent. . . . The Big Question
Yesterday I was somewhat amused by the fact that Mr Jeremy Cordyn was given a hard time for saying that if he was Prime Minister he would not press the big red button and nuke folk. Now you might say such a subject is not amusing and I would tend to agree particularly as there seem to be a lot of folk who are keen that Mr Corbyn should press the big red button. To be fair I don’t think they are suggesting that should he become Prime Minister that he rushes round to Number Ten descends down into the underground nuclear bunker and then presses the button just for the hell of it. What folk are saying is that he should be willing to press the thing under appropriate circumstances. Which we don’t tell folk; and thus it becomes this so called Nuclear Deterrent.
Well that is all well and good, but once you start to think about the logic of a nuclear deterrent, it starts to look a bit irrational as an idea. I mean the . . . if you Nuke us we will Nuke you concept . . . . . is a bit out dated. As those nations that have Nuclear Weapons are all interdependent economically so the likes of Russia even in the hands of President Putin is not going to fire intercontinental ballistic missiles at Britain or Europe, it would just totally mess up his own country and probably the rest of the world. The main argument given for these weapons as a deterrent is now rogue states such as North Korea or even Iran (Just a small point, but most Iranians are really nice and friendly . . . not mad Islamic terrorists), but would having nuclear weapons stop a lunatic dictator from trying to disrupt the world order of things. . . . I suspect not, in fact they might even deliberately target a country with nuclear weapons in order to escalate the crisis it would cause. Lets face it do you think that someone doing that is concerned about the people of their own country provided they have a nuclear bunker to keep themselves safe in for a while.
It is also rather hypercritical to say that we need to have the nuclear option as a deterrent, when those counties with nuclear weapons are so keen that those who do not have them don’t get them. Claiming it would increase the risk of a nuclear war and so everything must be done to stop this, (although it is OK for us to have them). If they (Nuclear Bombs) are such a good deterrent then everyone should have them. . . And the shear lunacy of that statement shows just how stupid it is to claim that having nuclear weapons stops there use.
weapons then there are many many very nasty alternative options that will make
folk thing twice about attacking us. Just imagine if ISIS (IS of ISIL) were to
get hold of nuclear weapons would our so called nuclear deterrent deter them
from using it, well I think we can safely say NO with big letters. Britain
My own view is that Mr Corbyn is right and when he is in parliament he should ask those keen to keep nuclear weapons exactly what sort of situation do they think that the Prime Minister is likely to encounter that will require him to press the button and zap a huge number of people maybe millions.
Sorry this is all a bit boring tonight, but as I said (sort of), I do find it strange that folk can find reasons to justify using nuclear weapons and would be interested to know what they are.