Il piano di indipendenza Swinney per rimuovere le armi nucleari è una “vittoria per Putin”
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25561355.swinney-independence-plan-remove-nuclear-weapons-win-putin/
di libtin
Il piano di indipendenza Swinney per rimuovere le armi nucleari è una “vittoria per Putin”
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25561355.swinney-independence-plan-remove-nuclear-weapons-win-putin/
di libtin
11 commenti
Because Putin famously has Glasgow as one of his prime targets.
/s
I don’t have an issue with Scotland deciding not to have nuclear weapons if they become an independent nation.
I don’t think it’s a smart move, but it’s their choice.
No country has ever regretted giving up a nuclear deterrent!
/s
Move them all to Anglesey. If they don’t want the facilities and the jobs associated give them to the Welsh
If trump wants to rewrite the world order by saying natos’s European allies need to pay more (despite, you know, the point of NATO being to prevent another European war), then it’s only natural that people are going to be taking another look at their military obligations to that alliance.
Perhaps we should take a look at the wider stage of what’s going on strategically before we focus in on this specific part?
Edit; having read the source; *”Successive Westminster governments have committed to billions on nuclear bombs while cutting conventional troop numbers”* – it would appear that the SNP is saying they would prefer to devote that spending to conventional arms, rather than nuclear missiles. It really isn’t as clear cut as saying it’s a “win for Putin” if we can actually put arms and armour on the ground rather than sit with our thumbs in our asses thinking nuclear strategy is all that matters.
Come on, now. Have we learned nothing from Ukraine?
Hopefully that policy alone is enough to undermine his plan
I’m guessing the assumption is that an independent Scotland would be protected under the UK or NATO’s nuclear umbrella. Much the same way that Ireland doesn’t really need to fear attack or invasion due to the threat it would pose to the UK (except from the UK I guess).
Detonating a nuke over Glasgow is obviously going to have massive effects on northern england at least so will warrant a response from London.
Ridiculous and reaching headline.
I’m not in favour of Scottish independence on the whole, though they should have that right if the public support it (which they famously didn’t when given a referendum on it just 10 years ago) but to say this is a “win for Putin” is stupid political point-scoring nonsense.
Seems every time someone doesn’t agree with something now in politics they’re “on Putin’s side” and it’s said so often, it’s lost all meaning and is becoming the new Godwin’s Law.
The UK, which would still exist if Scotland got independence, has nuclear weapons, not Scotland. We merely store the warheads there while they’re waiting to be loaded onto a sub. It’s not like we have land based missile silos in Scotland.
While expensive and a ballache, we could find somewhere else to load/offload them onto our subs.
I’m sympathetic to Scots independence but the SNPs “we can’t stand the English but they’ll pay for our defence and pensisons” act is honestly pathetic
Then isn’t the answer to bring the subs south of the border like in Plymouth which had facilities for subs at present. Assuming they have space for the extra infrastructure that would be required.
“No benefit to Britain”. How can a professional politician, irrespective of his ethical views, not realise that nukes have kept the world and especially Europe safer an they are the reason why you will never see a Russian boot on UK soil. If Ukraine had them, we would not be where we are now.