Do they want a new arms race?
PUBLISHED: 07:18 13 October 2006 | UPDATED: 19:49 01 June 2010
THE New Labour Government s proposed replacement for the Trident nuclear weapons system, at a cost of £25billion, is a scandalous waste of money as well as a dangerous escalation of nuclear armaments. Britain s nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruct
THE New Labour Government's proposed replacement for the Trident nuclear weapons system, at a cost of £25billion, is a scandalous waste of money as well as a dangerous escalation of nuclear armaments.
Britain's nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruction, capable of killing millions of people and are tied into US military and foreign policy and, far from deterring nuclear threats, replacing Trident may increase the risk of nuclear conflict.
Britain has about 200 nuclear warheads, each of which is at least eight times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, which killed 140,000 people
In an ICM poll of July 2006, 59 per cent of the British public said they would oppose a costly replacement of Trident.
The decisions to purchase Polaris, Chevaline, and Trident (Britain's various nuclear weapons systems over the years) were all taken without consulting Parliament
Eighty-one per cent of the British public believe the decision on whether or not to replace Trident should be made by a vote in Parliament, according to the ICM poll.
A total of 123 MPs have signed EDM 1197, which calls for a debate and deciding vote in Parliament on Trident replacement.
Nuclear weapons do not provide security and stability - on the contrary, any replacement of Trident will lead to a new nuclear arms race and increased global nuclear proliferation.
To actively pursue a new nuclear arms race by replacing Trident will only contribute to global tensions and lead other countries to conclude that they also need to develop nuclear weapons.