Skip to main content

Trident - and deterrence

Whereas I will be opposing the government's plans on this later today I thought I should put on record my views relating to this issue.

The underlying question is whether the UK should be in possession of nuclear weapons. That is weapons that are based upon the use of fission or fusion generated explosives. It is clear that we have moved on from the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction. However, it is not the case that we live in a safer world than during the cold war.

It is true that some of the hazards internationally have been developed by the actions of the UK and US governments in doing things which are destined to create nothing much more than enduring resentment. That does not mean, however, that all would have been sweetness and light had the UK not acted as it has.

The question, therefore, is whether there is a need for any weaponry based upon the more energetic nuclear systems rather than chemical explosives (not chemical weapons, however). I do think this is something that the UK should be looking at as a strategic option. The delivery systems, however, could be a mixture of plane and cruise or submarine. I do believe that there could be a role for a submarine based missile delivery system.

In essence the question that has to be asked is where there is a rogue state do we need to be able to use weaponry that does not involve targeting the population as a whole. I think the answer to this is yes. What can develop is a form of gangster dominated state that does not really care that much about its population, but does care about personal security for the leading members of the society. That is where these options need to be looked at.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…