Jeremy Corbyn: One step forward, two steps back.

[BlacLord™]

Jeremy Corbyn is the new Labour Party UK (left wing) leader. He's come a step forward as he seems to have inspired a younger generation into taking an interest in Politics. Open-minded and a forward thinker, all was going well until recently, when he revealed a dangerously naive view towards Trident (British nuclear programme), saying he wouldn't even renew them.


This is worrying. The Tories (right wing) are almost guaranteed to be out at the end of this term in favour of Labour, where this could come to fruition. A country with this much global presence suddenly dropping its nuclear arms?

I don't believe in using nuclear warheads but I do believe in keeping them, since their sheer presence is a deterrent. They were the only reason no direct military conflict occurred during the Cold War, because all powers had them and knew their power, and so, too scared to act.

 

[Pumpkin Ninja]

If only we could find a way for the whole world to scrap them simultaneously, but I think one leader doing so is stupid on his part.

I mean, you can't expect the nukes never to be used.

 

[BlacLord™]

If only we could find a way for the whole world to scrap them simultaneously, but I think one leader doing so is stupid on his part.

I mean, you can't expect the nukes never to be used.

He even said that he wouldn't use the ones we've got, no matter what. So whilst the UK gets pretty much merked if another country did fire off a few, we go in with run-of-the-mill bombs for as long as we're not annihilated.

Real leader potential right there. But yeah, it'd be good if we could get them to do that but you still run the risk of them hiding secret stores, like the UK did in unrecorded storage units during the Cold War.

 

[Fresco]

It's pretty smart, in my opinion. UK is in NATO, and as long as they're in NATO, they're guaranteed some reaction from the US on their behalf. There's really no point for them to have them.

 

[BlacLord™]

It's pretty smart, in my opinion. UK is in NATO, and as long as they're in NATO, they're guaranteed some reaction from the US on their behalf. There's really no point for them to have them.

The U.S. is too far in the event of nuclear war, and European allies aren't exactly flush enough to carry the UK's needs whilst protecting themselves. Well, apart from France. But it's not an effective long-term solution.

It's like lending money to a friend who is never going to be able to return it; and that's never good for the friendship.