Lib dems don't think we need a nuclear deterrent?

I love all the policies of the Lib dems but not having a nuclear deterrent seems ludicrous, what is their possible explanation for this ridiculous move? I don't think Money more important than our country defence and international standing, can anyone correct me if im wrong on this?

18 Answers

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago
    Best Answer

    I also agree with you, I think that if the did not want to remove our nuclear deterrent they would get my vote.

    This could be their downfall, unfortunately

  • Well has anyone thought of attacking the Swiss other than Libya boycotting their banks of course and it doesn't have a nuclear deterrent neither does a lot more countries in the world and is it not strange the ones all taken up in this war on terror have one thing in common they all have nuclear weapons they all have major companies that make up the Military industrial complex and all these companies were worried like hell when the Berlin wall came down that their was no longer the danger of the reds under every bed wanting to take over. Sure I may well be the only person in the world that thinks the real reason for this find a group to have a war with was to keep the developers of mass murder from losing shear price but its what I believe and no one has shown me the way to prove my idea as wrong in the last nine years

  • 3 years ago

    "Giving asylum to all unlawful immigrants" - Is something that develop into followed by using significant and till those days Labour. notwithstanding, the Lib Dems propose to objective this in co-operation with go out controls and far more suitable controls on who can come into this us of a. "scrapping trident,besides the very undeniable truth that i don't think of Iran ought to careless if we've a nuclear deterrent or no longer." - it truly is about searching at alternatives in a evaluation of the defence funds and about giving up the united kingdom's nuclear ability.

  • 10 years ago

    I agree with the Lib would be the best deterrent on the basis that no country with a no arms policy have been attacked with Nuclear weapons and I would say it was far more unlikely than being a Country who held them as a precaution..This is a wise argument from them..

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Syd
    Lv 6
    10 years ago

    That's not actually what they are saying. They are against simply renewing trident, which was designed to attack the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. Since those latter two institutions no longer exist, it is high time our deterrent reflected the world as it currently is.

    Helen S - that comment is beneath you. Were you drunk when you typed that? You've got that panther moron cheering you on now. You should blush deep blue with shame.

  • 10 years ago

    A nuclear deterrent didn't stop the 9/11 or other attacks

    I say we scrap Trident for a start & save 90 Billion pounds, that's a lot of JSA & we're going to need it especially if the toerags get in

  • 10 years ago

    The Lib dems don’t think we need a distinctive country either and will finish us off completely with the EU dictatorship. Goodbye freedom, Sterling and any remaining identity. Hello communal suffocation.

  • 10 years ago

    Excuse me, who gave you the right to think if you vote LibDem? What is it you don't understand about their policies? Nuclear deterrent? Laughable!! They're hoping to tie us into europe so closely that Nick achieves what Blair didn't - the Presidents job! Clegg is a career politician, doesn't have any real convictions or principles other than slagging off Cameron but Clegg also went to private school and Uni, in fact his parents are wealthier than Camerons! Brown pretends to have humble roots in a Scottish Manse but his parents were also very wealthy and he had both private schools and Uni too! Just do as you're supposed to do and vote for him on the 6th, then when you've allowed Labour and Brown another 5 years to drive this country so far into debt with China and the emerging far eastern countries - don't complain! As for a nuclear deterrent - Lol! perhaps for once in the history of this country the French might pull our ar*es out of the fire - but don't bet on it!

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    We don't need a nuclear deterrent, we just need to cut all ties with the United States of America, and stop playing their lapdog. The USA however supplies us with nothing of any value, and simply wishes to annex the UK as the 51st state. This is really why Scotland and Wales want their independence.

    Since Russia have all the Gas, we need closer ties with them in order to keep our houses heated and the lights on. We also need closer ties with European, African and Middle Eastern nations who supply the UK with everything we need.

    The only nation to use a nuclear/atomic bomb in anger is the USA, so if we did need any form of deterrent it would be to stop them, and not our friends from the near, middle and far east.

  • We've spent a bomb on it and we haven't even had a chance to use it yet. It seems a bit of a waste from that point of view. I have a funny feeling that if WW3 comes along the UK nuclear deterrent will be of little consequence.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.