15 March 2007


Stupid fucking idiots.

"It's a complete waste of money, it's no good against suicide bombers and we can't afford it."

Good on ya, Mr Benn, but you've missed the more important point. But who is this guy and why are we listening to him? I'm sure the article said he was a former PM, but apparently he wasn't.

Backing Blair, Margaret Beckett, the British foreign secretary, said no one could be sure a new nuclear threat would not emerge over the next 50 years."

But we can be sure that a current nuclear threat, the British one, will be maintained for no good reason over that period, and probably beyond.

She said Britain would reduce its stockpile of operationally available nuclear warheads by 20 per cent in 2007 to fewer than 160."

Wow, that's going such a long way to fulfilling your obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (sarcasm, that one, just in case you didn't notice).

Look, it's simple: Nuclear weapons are a threat to the entire world. It doesn't fucking matter who owns them, they're still a threat. Why does North Korea want nukes? 'Cos America has them. Why would Iran and Saudi Arabia want them (and it has not yet been proven that Iran does want them)? Because Israel has them. The solution? Not MAD, that's just stupid (anybody seen Dr Strangelove? Don't try and pretend that couldn't happen in real life). The only solution is disarmament, and that must begin with the five 'legal' nuclear powers unilaterally dismantling their arsenals. This may sound like the rantings of some nutcase extremist, or of a Kiwi, but let's put it this way: I kinda like this world we live on and I would be really pissed off if it were reduced to a cold, radioactive dustball inhabited only by cockroaches (which would die out pretty quickly as they ate up our remains).


Uncle Angel said...

Waste of money? Yup.
Good for dealing with terrorists? Nope.
Tony Benn a former PM? Nope.

We actually need the Bomb because... the French have it. After all, most of our wars for the past 950 years have been against the French. If we were to abandon a nuclear deterrent, it'd be 1066 all over again five minutes later.

Could the reason be more sound?

bezdomny said...

Odd, I'm sure the article said Tony Benn was a former PM. Oh well. Guess I should correct that.

Wait.... The last time the French won a war was...... 1066, right? Or maybe the Hundred Years' War- or did England just give up? And considering the state of the French military, they'd be reduced to riding a train through the chunnel armed with rusted pitch forks if they wanted to invade England.

Besides, who the hell would want England, anyway?