To:    Comment at the Guardian
Re:    On the rational road of nuclear deterence - and proliferation
Date: Wednesday 22 November 06

In response to a Guardian article, "A case for nuclear defence" by Malcolm Rifkind

Link to article and thread at The Guardian.
 

So, Malcolm Rifkind believes that the "most rational" decision is for Britain to maintain its strategic nuclear deterrent.

So let us take a closer look at Sir Malcom's "rationality":

" . . . there comes a point that no responsible government can cross without compromising Britain's ability to defend itself. An independent nuclear deterrent is a requirement of the age in which we live".

If this is true for Britain, surely it must also be true for India, Pakistan, North Korea , Iran or any other country. Or am I missing something?

These countries, far from "all heading in the opposite direction" to Britain, are in fact following Britain's example - and, no doubt, using the same arguments as Sir Malcolm to justify it.

Now, I didn't get a public school or Oxbridge education, so maybe it's my "rationality" that is at fault; but a little voice at the back of my head suggests to me that, in fact, it's Sir Malcolm's.

More of MY madness in the following post on "Nuclear Double Standards".

and at http://www.spaceship-earth.org