Push the Button and keep us Safe!!!...........

A big debate has been surfacing around the need for Nuclear weapons. BBC's Question Time showed just how divisive the subject can be. So before we continue this article, we will start by making it clear that Lefthub is against nuclear weapons and the idea of them being a deterrent. Now lets look at some hypothetical uses of the nuclear weapons and how much of a deterrent they really are.

If Ukraine still had nuclear weapons, Russian troops would not be in their country.

This was a point raised by a member of the audience on Question Time. So lets examine this argument further. We must presume the questioner thinks that the Ukraine government could have threatened the Russian government with the use of Nuclear weapons should it invade with troops or continue an invasion. We can see where this view comes, from but there is a gaping flaw with the argument. Russia also have Nuclear weapons, and a lot more than the Ukraine. So they could simply counter by saying if you do fire nuclear missiles at us, we will wipe out your country with our nuclear missiles. This would most likely result with a stalemate of Nuclear weapon use and the invasion continues. That is unless the Ukraine would like to ensure the extinction of their citizens and fire the first missile.

Somebody, somewhere has fired nuclear missiles at us.

In this situation its too late. Thousands, millions or even all of us will be killed. Does the ability to fire a missile or two back give me comfort? Does that feel like justice to me? No. A nuclear attack on the UK would result as we said, in the loss of millions of innocent lives. Retaliating by firing back and killing millions more innocent people does not provide me with any satisfaction at all. Its most likely in fact that the people responsible for firing the first nukes would be tucked up safe and sound in a bunker somewhere, so we would only be killing more innocent people.

We pre-empt a nuclear attack and fire the first nukes. 

We gather intelligence that a nuclear attack could be imminent. The response is to striker first. Of course again this guarantees millions of lives lost. It also would all but guarantee a counter strike of nuclear attacks on the UK, even if we were wrong in the first place. Intelligence has proven to be wrong in the past countless times. Pre-empting a nuclear attack and striking first does nothing but guarantee nuclear war and destruction.



So for the sake of the argument lets imagine the UK is under threat of invasion from Russia, after all they seem to be the example the media continue to point to in order to justify the need for these weapons of mass destruction. As I sit here writing this blog, I contemplate how I would like us to face a Russian invasion. The loss of innocent life through war, be it English or Russian seems an abhorrent idea to me Personally I would rather rewrite the whole thing in Russian than be disintegrated as a result of Nuclear warfare. As ultimately that would be the choice when you bring Nuclear weapons into it. Surrender and be ruled by Russia or be Killed. Id sooner dig out my Ushanka-hat and pay my taxes to Putin than not exist at all and I imagine if the moment came most people would opt for Russian rule than death. Remember guys, "Безопасность прежде всего"





Follow us @lefthub