Make Trident History

Yesterday evening the Scottish CND march from Faslane to the Scottish Parliament stopped off at Bathgate with just two days march to go. They held a public meeting at St. David's Church at which Bruce Kent, Michael Connarty MP and Fiona Hyslop MSP were the guest speakers. I sat in the audience and was acknowledged by both the local politicians and had passing mention in their comments.

£250 Billion pounds is earmarked as a replacement for the current Trident nucleur deterent. Strange that the UK government and their US buddies should be saying that Iran, North Korean and others should not be allowed to carry on proliferation of nucleur weapons when they themselves are seeking to replace their soon to be redundent systems. We see these countries as a threat and yet maintain a system which by all accounts we have no intention of using.

Last year many people more people marched to Make Poverty History than are on this march for peace. Many people were upset by how little the G8 leaders in the end promised to donate to Make World Poverty History. Yet here we are proposing such large spending on a system that will in all likelihood not be fired in anger just like Trident. It is something which not even Alastair Campbell could spin into being an important weapon in the war on terrorism.

Technology in warfare has moved on since the nucleur option was paraded as the new must have in the 50s and 60s. We now have satilite guided precision weapons which by in large actually take out their target with minimal collateral damage. A nucluer warhead is simply going to have massive civilain repercusions for years and decades after it is used.

Michael Connarty expressed his desire that the vote on replacing Trident be put to a free vote in Westminster, not under the control of the whips. I agree with him on that it would free up many on the Government payrole to vote with their consence and not merely on a party line which has drifted from one camp to the other during the time most Labour MPs have been members of their party.

Do we need a nucleur weapon of mass destruction? If we did threathen to use it shouldn't some country be given liberty to invade us and topple our government? After all this is what we dis to Iraq so we can have no arguments there. So what is the point of having such a weapon?

Let's not replace Trident but use the money far more sensibly.