£100,000,000,000
SnowStorm86
Posts: 17,273 Forum Member
✭✭
Would you spend it on Trident replacement or invest it in other areas of governance, such as education, health, conventional defence, lowering our debt.
Do you think it would be money well spent? Do you think it's money we can even afford to be spending when we're repeatedly being told that austerity is for the good of the Country?
I'm not convinced that we need more WMDs in the world. Especially ones with a price tag like that.
Do you think it would be money well spent? Do you think it's money we can even afford to be spending when we're repeatedly being told that austerity is for the good of the Country?
I'm not convinced that we need more WMDs in the world. Especially ones with a price tag like that.
0
Comments
I would much prefer some of the Trident money being used to strengthen our security services with the rest going towards health/social care or social housing. Most of Western Europe seem to be perfectly happy without nuclear weapons so wasting so much money on this is not something that I can ever agree with.
Imagine if only say Russia had nuclear weapons. How long do you think we would be living in a free country?
If we gave up Trident, the American taxpayer would have to take up the burden of providing the nuclear umbrella to cover us. Plus if it came to a choice between saving us or American cities they would abandon us.
Countries without nuclear weapons such as Germany rely on Britain, France and America to defend them from nuclear armed countries via a deterrent.
Mind you the same people telling us we have a choice and could get rid of Trident are the same people that say austerity is a choice.
It seems a lot when put like that but it's a drop in the ocean when considered alongside other parts of the budget.
Even the aid budget is far larger over the same period. Consider the aid budget at ten billion or so a year for 30 years and you would be asking if it wouldn't be better spent on UK Health and duration projects.
While austerity is for the country's good, I'd also say that defence is too.
It's not one trillion, it's 100 billion.
One trillion is
£1,000,000,000,000
So the number quoted is 10% of a trillion. Incidentally, it's less than the current national debt that no politicians have mentioned in the election.
Thanks labour.
I do but then I have conventional troops (3 large dogs).
It gives Britain a permanent seat at the top table at the UN, and by having that seat a veto at the UN - all be it probably when America says so, and a small voice on global matters at the UN via the seat. Without an essentially American nuke with a British sticker on the side of it, Britain whould have to give all that up, and the seat, vote and voice would be given to another country with nukes like India/Pakistan/Isreal/North Korea. Do you still want to give up Trident and our [American] bomb?
Yep..
You have just lowered Britain's international standing to the same level as Belgium's. Well done.
Don't much care.
But a home security system that takes out the entire estate along with the burglar could be perceived as a wee bit OTT.
I always wonder if those using house metaphors for nuclear weapons would escalate a burglary into them going round and blowing the burglars house up, then their own then everyone elses then watching their kids die of starvation or radiation poisining since they clearly are for mutually assured destruction.
You would if your job depended on Trident/Britains bomb..
on money to govts with aircraft carriers mig 27 fighters and nuclears weapons space programs
money well spent?
for people who eat too much
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/20/obesity-bigger-cost-than-war-and-terror
see i can multiply numbers together
Hear, hear.
Trident is a deterrent and a retaliatory attack. House alarms are only deterrents unless you can show me a house alarm that is capable of blowing up a burglar (and most of the house with it...)
In addition Trident is only a deterrent against other nuclear powers in the event of a nuclear attack. Even if Putin invited himself and his ground troops into Scotland on the grounds that they are there to facilitate another referendum would we consider using Trident as a deterrent? No of course not.
Are we going to nuke fundamentalist guerrilla fighters hiding amongst innocent people in the middle east? No of course not.