Less than 1/4 of Scots feel safer with nuclear weapons in Clyde

[Better Day 5,766]

“ONLY a quarter of Scots voters have said they feel safer having nuclear weapons based on the Clyde, according to a new opinion poll.

The latest survey from James Kelly asked people the question: “The UK Government argues that its nuclear weapons protect the public due to a ‘deterrent’ effect. However, others argue that the presence of nuclear weapons on the Clyde puts the public in greater danger by making the area a target for nuclear attacks, and by creating a risk of serious accidents.” 
 

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19272880.less-quarter-scots-feel-safer-nuclear-weapons-clyde/?fbclid=IwAR1GubpFI762FlTS6QEGgpvA4N4R2Aue9bgD9iuHDpjuWNbNJWwcS-SXKx8
 

Scrap Trident. Scrap nuclear weapons 

[bionic 50,111]

Boris should move the nukes to Buckingham Palace or Downing Street. Make leaders really be accountable for their actions and not toying with weapons hundreds of miles away

[Better Day 5,766]

3 minutes ago, bionic said:

Boris should move the nukes to Buckingham Palace or Downing Street. Make leaders really be accountable for their actions and not toying with weapons hundreds of miles away

Dump them into the Thames 

[Rj Barker 3,331]

In an ideal world we wouldn't need nuclear deterrent and one of the major players needs to be the first to get rid of them, but until that happens they're not going anywhere. I asked my fiancé what he thinks about them being there as he's Scottish. His answer was that they're there because downing Street doesn't care if Scotland gets blown up.  sounds about right. 

[Benji 20,113]

They’re a necessary evil unfortunately.  There are some public knowledge ones in Reading (just outside London) and many more scattered out throughout the U.K. that go unpublicised.

[Better Day 5,766]

25 minutes ago, Rj Barker said:

In an ideal world we wouldn't need nuclear deterrent and one of the major players needs to be the first to get rid of them, but until that happens they're not going anywhere. I asked my fiancé what he thinks about them being there as he's Scottish. His answer was that they're there because downing Street doesn't care if Scotland gets blown up.  sounds about right. 

 

8 minutes ago, Benji said:

They’re a necessary evil unfortunately.  There are some public knowledge ones in Reading (just outside London) and many more scattered out throughout the U.K. that go unpublicised.

Plenty of countries don’t have nuclear weapons. Many European countries don’t have nuclear weapons

[Benji 20,113]

Just now, Miss Dolly said:

 

Plenty of countries don’t have nuclear weapons. Many European countries don’t have nuclear weapons

They do have allies with nuclear weapons though.  When it comes to defence, you either need to have a big beat stick yourself or be reliant on your allies having a beat stick for you.  Issue is, who are your allies and do you believe in them to defend you?  If you’re attacked by Russia, will they rush to your aid or accept losing your country as a price they’re willing to pay?

It’s generally better to have a beat stick and protect your own interests than be reliant on others to do it for you.

(Not defending any party or political association by the way, I’m anti-war but I do believe we will always need to be able to defend ourselves and interests)

[Better Day 5,766]

Just now, Benji said:

They do have allies with nuclear weapons though.  When it comes to defence, you either need to have a big beat stick yourself or be reliant on your allies having a beat stick for you.  Issue is, who are your allies and do you believe in them to defend you?  If you’re attacked by Russia, will they rush to your aid or accept losing your country as a price they’re willing to pay?

It’s generally better to have a beat stick and protect your own interests than be reliant on others to do it for you.

(Not defending any party or political association by the way, I’m anti-war but I do believe we will always need to be able to defend ourselves and interests)

I do understand the need for nuclear weapons but I do not want them 20 miles from Scotland’s biggest city. Scotland does not support Trident polls have found. Trident should be carted down to the Thames

[Benji 20,113]

3 minutes ago, Miss Dolly said:

I do understand the need for nuclear weapons but I do not want them 20 miles from Scotland’s biggest city. Scotland does not support Trident polls have found. Trident should be carted down to the Thames

Understandable and I have sympathy.  I live next to one of the biggest military bases down south and my office has bomb shields all along the outside... I must say working from home gives me a much nicer view out the window but I guess I’m dead if someone decided to attack  

[Better Day 5,766]

1 minute ago, Benji said:

Understandable and I have sympathy.  I live next to one of the biggest military bases down south and my office has bomb shields all along the outside... I must say working from home gives me a much nicer view out the window but I guess I’m dead if someone decided to attack  

I am just hoping to see the end of nukes on the British Isles in my lifetime. The day Trident is shifted from Faslane will the day I am truly happy. 

[Benji 20,113]

1 minute ago, Miss Dolly said:

I am just hoping to see the end of nukes on the British Isles in my lifetime. The day Trident is shifted from Faslane will the day I am truly happy. 

I think Trident’s days are numbered, it’s a bit outdated now we’re shifting to drones.  I imagine we’ll start looking to store any nautical nuclear weaponry off shore.

[Better Day 5,766]

Just now, Benji said:

I think Trident’s days are numbered, it’s a bit outdated now we’re shifting to drones.  I imagine we’ll start looking to store any nautical nuclear weaponry off shore.

Unless Scotland goes independent and the tories are in power this version of Trident is here to stay since they’ve just renewed them. 

[Benji 20,113]

1 minute ago, Miss Dolly said:

Unless Scotland goes independent and the tories are in power this version of Trident is here to stay since they’ve just renewed them. 

I will respectfully disagree.  The new and increased defence budget focuses on modernising the United Kingdom’s defence and army.  Whilst Trident may be here now, it will certainly be replaced once we have a better way of defending the United Kingdom and I believe this will be off shore as no one wants nuclear weapons on their doorstep.

[Gagasfirstnose 89]

I'm assuming they are there for strategic reasons. Nukes are also stored only 42 miles away from London also, so It's about covering ground. They are also stored all over Germany despite Germany itself not being a Nuclear power. It's the old adage, we have them so we never need to use them and they gotta be stored somewhere!

[bionic 50,111]

1 minute ago, Gagasfirstnose said:

I'm assuming they are there for strategic reasons. Nukes are also stored only 42 miles away from London also, so It's about covering ground. They are also stored all over Germany despite Germany itself not being a Nuclear power. It's the old adage, we have them so we never need to use them and they gotta be stored somewhere!

Just from Wikipedia:

This location was chosen as the base for nuclear-armed submarines at the height of the Cold War because of its position close to the deep and easily navigable Firth of Clyde. It provides for rapid and stealthy access through the North Channel to the patrolling areas in the North Atlantic, and through the GIUK gap between Iceland and Scotland to the Norwegian Sea. Also based there are Astute-class nuclear-powered fleet submarines (SSNs).

So yeah, definitely a strategic placement. 

EDIT: I'm on the fence about nuclear deterrents so don't have much else to offer but facts