Vanilla is a product of Lussumo:Documentation and Support.
1 to 20 of 26
the world of intelligence and national security is vital to the UK. It's what makes us the country that we are and gives us the political dominance that allows positive intervention and stabilisation of international conflict and protects our population. If we cannot efficiently defend against cyber-warfare or develop state-of-the-art counter measures to superweapons or fundamental terrorism from ANY dangerous individual or collective group then we are at risk of serious exploitation from developing superpowers and individual regimes.
so that we in the USA can begin to make significant cuts in our own defense budget
In the electoral debate, Cameron clarified the Conservative policy on Trident and nuclear launch capability by saying that the future is uncertain, and we cannot know what threats we will face. This statement is more than true, especially when it comes to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, but what Cameron did not touch upon is how today's policies and actions form tomorrow's reality. If, as the conservative government is so often keen to point out, Britain is a great and important nation, our actions have serious repercussions on the world stage.The principle of mutually assured destruction, the efficacy of which this government implicitly trusts in by backing continued and developed nuclear launch capability is a transparently flawed notion, hostage to the potentially unpredictable and irrational actions of human individuals with nuclear authority. To call nuclear launch capability a form of defence is at best a distortion of the the truth, and at worst an outright lie.It is hypocritical in the extreme to use the future insecurity of our country's defence as a political bargaining chip, when the nuclear launch capability being bargained for might just as easily indirectly undermine that same security. In a time when nuclear weapons proliferation threatens to begin again in earnest, how can Britain seriously take part in any negotiations designed to halt armament, when it officially recognises the necessity of remaining armed. How does this new government expect foreign nations to react? How can we simultaneously see another nation's nuclear arms as a threat, and our own as a defence? Surely this is a most pernicious form of doublethink.