It's probably only the news about the dissolution of Parliament and the coming General Election that is keeping Obama's review of the USA's nuclear posture from being the top story today.
It's great news that Obama is reducing the US's reliance on nuclear weapons and being clear as to the very limited and frankly unlikely circumstances under which he'd press the button.
It's also great news (well not exactly news, I'm a week late with this one!) that our own David Milliband is also saying that we need to reduce our nuclear arsenal. Why then is he part of a government that wants to waste £97 billion on replacing Trident?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8590292.stm
We should be joining the US and Russia in reducing the number of nuclear warheads we have not planning to replace the ones we already have. We should be stating clearly the circumstances in which these illegal, disproportionate, indiscriminate atomic abominations would be used. The sort of regimes these things are designed to deter aren't around any more. Mr Milliband; the USSR is no more.
Currently Labour and the Conservatives are trying to have it both ways. They want to have their atomic weapons, and strut their funky stuff at the UN at the same time as they want to follow the US and Russia in getting rid of nuclear weapons. Which is it to be folks?
Who wins? You decide!
Comments