Protest at Faslane on 6 March -against £25b spend on Trident

[Pete Reek]

Well said Mr Jock.
Of course to say you disagree with the those that want to spend time taking in the sights and sounds of Faslane, is to leave yourself open to ridicule.I suspect you already know that though.

Those wee badges with the Mercedes Benz logo on them that they used to wear on occasions like the Faslane thingy were like Victoria Crosses to some.

I have heard the opinions of the Nuclear Disarmament lobby. I personally don't agree with a lot of what they put forward, so I am still in agreement with retaining the Nuclear Arms we have in Britain.

[John S]

Well said Mr Jock.
Of course to say you disagree with the those that want to spend time taking in the sights and sounds of Faslane, is to leave yourself open to ridicule.I suspect you already know that though.

I don't think that anyone should be ridiculed on nuke's Pete since there is no evidence either way to suggest that they do or don't contribute towards stopping war. There is more war today than at anytime since WW2, but no one has ever used tactical nukes.

Some countries with nukes have never been at war others never seem to be at piece in spite of their arsenal.

I remain to be convinced.
I'm pretty sure though that, as a generalisation, having superior firepower does not bring piece and in many instances singles you out as a target.

bombs away lads.

[ionnsaigh]

" While Homo-Sapiens roam the earth they will always fight each other"
This view of interpersonal relationships is a value judgement and as such, as with any broad sweeping generalisation it must be treated with caution and a degree of suspicion, as to it's accuracy and authenticity.

Looking at the sentence again in terms of semantics , akin to finding the rotten apple in the barrel then the term roam has to identified as such. The first problem; Man is essentially an Animal, the highest in terms of evolutionary progress, an animal nonetheless. I think it would be fair to state that most people settle down, we may have retained our ancestors ability to roam although generally speaking this is no longer the case, hence the presence of dialect and language belonging to groups of people. These manifestations are clearly the fruit of discourse and cooperation between people. Our language alone suffices to contradict your bold assertion.
I mean how bold can you get when you speak on behalf of the whole planet.
My own limited experience of the people of Scotland suggest that yes we are a warrior people however we live in relatively peaceful coexistence. Where is the fighting in the toon between neighbours and friends, or more importantly is this the rule or the exception to it . If it where to be the first then your analysis would be correct.
thankfully for everyone concerned it isn't .

[jester and the fool]

I have the privelage,along with others,to see H.M.S Vanguard and co slice through the water to their pens on a regular basis,and my take on it is very simple.If I had a choice of nuclear armament or not,i would have to say not.At the end of the day though do i care? shit no! Why? because we will all be dead anyway,whether we had a deterant or not.Political muscle flexing thats what.Whats the point of worrying over something that we have no control over!!!!(and never will)
Right i'm away to tell my teenage kids that i love them(oooo how they will enjoy!!!)

Keep smiling your smile

[Friend of Dorothy]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Tom B]

Bus will leave Campbeltown 6 a.m. on Tuesday 6th March, returning back in to the town at around 8pm that evening. There’ll also be a chance to meet one of the team from faslane365 in advance in Campbeltown on Saturday 3rd afternoon, to find out what’s involved.

For me, this is about spending our money where it will be most effective. The £25 billion spent on Trident is £25 billion less to be spent on tackling climate change, which I see as a greater threat to this country. In reality, there is a finite amount of cash to be spent by government on our behalf, so we have to prioritise. Climate change is real and is here now - (how many frosty mornings has there been this winter?, on the skiing on the TV this morning, they said they were skiing in unseasonal temperatures of 15 degrees etc etc.)) and it is going to get much worse if action isn’t taken (up to 5 degrees rise this century, according to the IPCC). The £25 billion should therefore be spent on tackling climate change, for example by insulating houses better, improving public transport and investing in renewable energy technology research. (Thereafter we are in a stronger position to influence US, China, India etc)

And as noted elsewhere in this thread, we wouldn’t ever intend using nuclear weapons anyway, and their effectiveness as a deterrent is unproven. So can’t we instead use the tools of political diplomacy, financial and economic incentives, and as a last resort the conventional military, to keep the threat of a nuclear event minimised?

When there is such a real threat presented by climate change, I just think Trident is a bad investment. If we do choose to invest £25 billion in renewing Trident, we have to be clear on the lost opportunity to have spent the cash on something much more useful.

[ionnsaigh]

Tom B,
Firstly I would like to wish you every success in your endeavour, and hope that you have a full bus on the day.
Come on Kintyre stand up for peace, make your presence felt on the day, to raise public awareness stick some posters up in the toon. Get the message out to the young through Bebo.

On a personal level I tend to worry more about nuclear weapons than I do climate change, the thing that really tops my agenda is the unequal distribution of wealth and the inherent contradiction strikingly apparent in both extremities chiefly the division between rich and poor.

When you site climate change as the principal environmental challenge that faces the world, you have previously concluded that climate change would ultimately effect everyone- be they rich or poor, capitalist or worker. For me It is to broad a brush to say that Mankind is responsible.
Who or what is really to be held to account for the rape of our planets resources, the fouling of our air, and the wars that cast doubt on our civilisation. Solve this problem and the rest should follow, in other words give the earth back to the people who care and love.

The removal of poverty must- for all to follow- be my primary objective. I was up in Drumchapel twice last week, noticed a group of youngsters playing , it was very cold none of these children had any warm clothing.
This to me and others of good will- has far more pressing concerns, than the battle flag of the middle classes.

[Sweltered]

And how much do their parents spend on booze and fags?

Appologies for going off topic

[Tom B]

The meeting this Saturday will be in the town hall from 1pm - 3pm with one of the team from faslane365 there to give a short talk on what's involved, and answer any questions.

Channel4 poll today
24% - said they thought that Britain should have the best possible nuclear deterrent in 20 years,
24% - thought the UK should keep its current weapons but not invest in more.
20% - said nuclear weapons may have been important during the Cold War, but are no longer necessary.
29% - said Britain does not need nuclear weapons now and should never have had them in the first place.

Firstly I would like to wish you every success in your endeavour, and hope that you have a full bus on the day.

Thank you

[Ross]

how many of those people realise that if we give up nuclear weapons we no longer have a seat in the UN perm security council and therefore give up our power in the world areana

[Sheik Yir Erse]

Ross - in your eyes how has a Permanent Seat on the Security Council helped us down the years?

How have, for example, Norway managed as a nation without this exclusive seat?

I don't think it's co-incidence that all 5 permanent members are nuclear powers, however not all nuclear powers are permanent members, i.e. India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel (if only anyone actually knew how mcuh they had - no weapons inspectors there???)

Don't want to get off thread here, but I don't see the two as being intrinsically linked?

So I surmise it is possible for us to retain our Nuclear deterrent and NOT have a seat on the UNSC, which is probably what I'm more sceptical off. However if someone can tell me what the UNSC have done for Scotland (or UK) then I'd be more than happy to be enlightened!

[gromit]

If we didn't have a permanent seat on the UNSC then perhaps we would spend less time poking our noses into the affairs of countries thousands of miles away and could instead concentrate on sorting out a few of our more local issues?

[bill]

Agree 100% Gromit.
The days of Britain being a world power are long gone.Let's concentrate on getting ourselves out of the mess we are in at home, and leave other countries to sort themselves out.

[petewick]

I agree, a nuclear device can be triggered from a hotel room, causing mass devastation regardless of the so called deterrent of that country.
Good luck to all who go to Faslane on the 6th, can't go myself as I'm stuck at work.


petewick

[vinyl junkie]

No matter how many people protest about the new nukes, the government is still going to buy them because they have been told to by their American masters. The best way to protest about nukes in Scotland is to find a political party that has been consistent in it's objection to nuclear arms and vote it into office this May. Oops, sorry. I had to duck under that flying pig with a consistent politician on it's back !