Nuclear weapons keep you safe


Havana Saint
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Trident vote was a foregone conclusion sadly.

For me the outcome wasn't as disappointing as some of the arguments that people used to justify their existence. Arguing that they created job is like arguing to retain slavery because labour rates would go up.

It was also disappointing to see politicians who purported to have opposed nuclear weapons all their lives voting for them. And don't even get me start on Hillary Benn; Tony must be rolling in his grave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A large number of uk MPs have a vested interest in the companies that make trident or in the banks etc that supply money to these companies. This is among both Tory and red Tory MPs. There should be rules in place that stop MPs voting in issues in which they can gain monetarily. I thought there was such a rule but it clearly did not apply in this vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A large number of uk MPs have a vested interest in the companies that make trident or in the banks etc that supply money to these companies. This is among both Tory and red Tory MPs. There should be rules in place that stop MPs voting in issues in which they can gain monetarily. I thought there was such a rule but it clearly did not apply in this vote.

Normal MP's have to declare an interest, but having done so can then vote how they like. Ministers would be in fairly deep brown stuff if they did this, though. Most of them sell-up any potentially dodgy or even all investments on appointment these days. But that's not how the money is made - it comes in directorships and consultancies with the companies they regulate after they leave office.

In fairness, Rolls Royce, BAE etc are such ginormous companies that it would be difficult not to have any connection with them in some way if you invest. You might not own shares in them, but you might in the company that makes a widget for them, or sells them loo roll, etc. That's why so-called ethical investments are a bit of a joke - economies now are so integrated that everything relies on everything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anyone seriously suggesting we get rid of them whilst China and Russia etc have them, saving £200 billion is no good if the country is radio-active.  One bomb hitting London alone would cause £200 billion damage in about 20 seconds, also 5 million dead. The money would be spent on aircraft carriers, tanks and other weapons if the nuclear weapons were scrapped, not on bairns and foodbanks as some believe. Do you think the Yanks would have bombed the Japs if the Japs could have sent nuclear weapons to the Yanks west coast, almost certainly not. Fair enough, if EVERYONE gets rid of them then fine, but not the UK on it's own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share