I warmly welcome Chris Huhnes intervention over Trident for three reasons and intend to come to his defence over the charge of oppertunism and trying to dictate party policy.
Firstly I agree with him. I'm not a Unilaterialist per se seeing the logic of keep a small number of war heads while many other countries do. However Trident is in my view a collosially expensive, unusable piece of Junk that owes more to post imperial fantasies of former glories than 21st Centuary needs. The current policy is a hopeless fudge which just brings the party into disrepute.
Secondly he is right to speak outr because this is what leadership elections are for. The current fudge only passed conference by 40 votes after an impassioned leadership intervention. If he were saying he intended to make conscription party policy then people may have a point about dictating policy. However saying we will re examine something that was passed so closely seems fine to me.
Thirdly he is right to say something intersting. I take back every word about the time table being to short. Mid December seems an eternity away if we only have two Candidates that agree with each other. If we must have another leadership election then Trident is as worthy a topic as any.
Monday, October 29, 2007
First Strike Capability
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
Why do you favour retaining any nuclear warheads? The only reason is that there are circumstances in which you would like to see them used.
Could you tell us what they are?
If they involve defence, can you tell us why non-nuclear states haven't needed such defence?
Should all countries have a small number of warheads too? If not, what are the UK's special qualities that merit our membership of an elite club who deserve to threaten annihilation to great swathes of the world?
Can you tell us why you support the UK's continued breach of international law in not going swiftly and actively for full disarmament as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty obliges us to?
Post a Comment