EACH time an election comes around the same matter stirs the mind of several of your correspondents. That they are free to air these views is a requisite of a democratic society and I respect their right to do so, but at the same time I totally reject their premise.
Let me deal with some of the points raised by Brian M Quail (Letters, November 25), who composes numerous epistles in opposition to nuclear weapons in particular and the participation of the United Kingdom in the maintenance of a nuclear deterrent.
Mikhail Gorbachev has stated that “nuclear weapons must be destroyed”, a noble thought from man who is widely regarded as having contributed greatly to the end of the cold war. It should also be noted that while in power and promoting Glasnost he recognised that the Soviet Union should maintain a minimal number of nuclear weapons for "protection".
Nuclear deterrence is not about “being second to murder millions of people”, it is about stopping the unthinkable. Therefore, it requires a visible and viable policy. A policy that extends from the hardware, the dedication and training of the crews and the political will of our elected representatives to carry out and maintain the ethos of deterrence. It follows from this that any prospective candidate for Prime Minister whose political manifesto includes deterrence must answer yes to the question posed to Jo Swinson and I applaud her candour and honesty.
In order for deterrence to work, as it has for the last 74 years, brave and dedicated servicemen and women such as the captain of the first Vanguard class missile boat whom Mr Quail quotes as having said “with this thing we can hit any target in the world from anywhere” have to train hard to do the unthinkable. It is this dedication that enables the United Kingdom to play its part in keeping the spectre of nuclear Armageddon away from the world.
This will be the case until the world finds a way to multilaterally disarm and of equal importance put the nuclear genie back in the bottle, seal it and bury it in the deepest part of the oceans.
I now pose a few questions to those who oppose nuclear weapons.
What nation or group of nations, in this dangerous world, goes first in the attempt to rid the world of nuclear weapons? Should it be, in alphabetical order, China, France, India, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, the United Kingdom and/or the United States?
Would I feel safer if the Western democracies abandoned all nuclear weapons in the hope that Vladimir Putin’s Russia, North Korea and China would follow?
Would I sleep safe in my bed if the only countries in the world with nuclear weapons were Russia, North Korea and China?
Would the world be a safer place if the only powers with access to nuclear weapons were states ruled by religious zealots?
My answer to these questions is that I would not be safer and neither would anyone.
Joe Hughes, Wishaw.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel