THE fallacy in Mr Cole’s argument for keeping the out-of-date, UK nuclear deterrent misses one key fact – it is irrelevant. (Letters, July 24)
The cost of Dreadnought is now many billions more than was first stated, the project is more than 10 years late in delivery and unlikely to enter commission until the late 2030s, using a variant of Trident the US Navy is no longer developing, is taking out of service by 2050 at the latest and is not launching any support satellites for after 2040.
The current Vanguard-class ballistic submarines are now on their last legs and have had millions spent on them simply to get their propellers to turn. Due to operating conditions on board, they are struggling to find crews to man them. As a result of both crew and hull shortages, the bombers are on extended patrols which further damages crew morale and retention.
On present UK Armed Forces levels, without help from Nato allies, we would struggle to defend ourselves from boats of illegal immigrants carrying AK-47s, let alone a serious attacker.
READ MORE: Scottish council investment in key Israel arms supplier soars 12-fold
The army is going through a recruitment crisis with a 10% shortfall recorded last year versus numbers required for the status quo.
The late ordering of new frigates by politicians means Type 23s – which should have been reduced to razor blades by now – are having to have expensive refits to “extend life”.
Some of the hulls that were scheduled to be refitted were sent for scrap due to their perilous states. The army is having to put up with a remodelling of 20-year-old tanks as “new” tanks, and the RAF has turned their Typhoon interceptors into fighter bombers as there was no Tornado replacement.
The US Joint Chiefs of Staff, in the early 2000s, opposed the UK getting access to Trident 3 because they felt the investment would be better spent strengthening the UK’s conventional forces and added little to benefit to the overall Nato nuclear arsenal (aka the USA’s).
As a once naval officer, I can only concur with the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. Nato has a simple policy – an attack on one member is an attack on all members.
If it goes nuclear, I would suggest that, whether the UK has a nuclear deterrent or not, you should pucker up and kiss your bahookie goodbye.
Peter Thomson
via email
NICE to see The National recognise Glasgow Anniesland MSP Bill Kidd for his steady and diligent work in the UN, opposing nuclear weapons of mass destruction. The support he receives from non-nuclear weapon countries in and out of Nato is rarely recognised in the pro-nuclear imperialist media. Bill will be abroad today making the case in the UN, again.
Elsewhere on the readers’ page, a Perthshire reader wrote what sounded to me like an ambivalent and rather complicated roonaboot reply to veteran anti-nuclear campaigner Brian Quail, supporting multilateral, instead of unilateral, disarmament.
Brian will be attending the funeral of fellow anti-nuclear campaigner, Scottish nationalist and Scottish republican, the late Hamish MacQueen today, in Maryhill Crematorium at 2.15 pm and later at the purvey, Maryhill, Lochburn Social Club.
READ MORE: Labour accused of ‘jaw-dropping’ hypocrisy over private jet use
An independent Scotland will have better things to do than be cannon fodder for England. Nuclear weapons are not for us as a matter of principle, not just costs. Let the English nimbies decide where to stick their nuclear weapons of mass destruction.
Years ago, I attended a nuclear protest at Coulport. Someone failed to light a large Butcher’s Apron on a huge tree branch. The late Hamish MacQueen poured a can of petrol over it and it burst into a huge flame. Dressed in a kilt, I seized it, like a caber and tossed it over the gate.
It fell on a hapless painter in a bosun’s chair and bounced onto a security guard.
Luckily, no-one was hurt. Though the Sunday Pest wrote a small front-page piece: “Militant Scottish Nationalist throws Union Jack over MoD Guard”.
We had a tent protest village camp on the shores of the loch outside the MoD camp. Some Drumchapel youngsters threw stones at a rowing boat, of the Earl of Argyll, I believe.
He was merely handing over a catch of fish for the happy campers. He did not want those rockets pointing outwards towards Glasgow in his area.
Oor Hamish came into some inheritance money and provided a large marquee tent, in the days afore gazebos, plus a mini-bus, food, etc and cases of beer, though he rarely drank himself. Earlier, some English marines attacked a 13-year-old girl and shouted from their truck, “Go home”.
A newly retired Scots Guard sojer, happened to be fishing and was accidentally caught up in the melee when the Weegies retaliated.
The campers tied him to the central tent pole, pretending they were going to torture him. They started drinking beer in front of him, holding the cans up, before releasing him and offering him food and drink.
He enjoyed the joke and joined up when he realised what had happened and the marines had been at fault, and sent them homewards to think again.
Donald Anderson
Glasgow
I READ that the King’s income has increased by 53% and he’s ordered two new helicopters – because obviously he needs a spare!
Meanwhile, Labour are still refusing to publish the legal advice on arms sales to Israel! If that wasn’t bad enough, earlier this week, almost all Scottish Labour MPs voted against the two-child benefit cap being lifted by marching
through the voting lobbies like complicit toy soldiers!
Don’t you just love having the Conservatives Mk II back in charge? Guaranteed to disregard their electorate’s wishes at all times and do as they please.
CHANGE? Don’t make me laugh!
Steve Cunningham
Aberdeen
AT some point in history humans decided to go along with someone else’s narrative. That there’s an expert for this and an expert for that. Money, which is just an IOU, replaced bartering. We allowed strangers to gather our food and water. We began to blame someone else when things go wrong. We usually refer to such people as government or just “they”.
The recent incident involving Crowdstrike and only one error negatively affecting millions of people is just one example of where all this leads to.
Those who found history boring will find the future very exciting.
Geoff Moore
Alness, Highland
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel