Cameron, Trident and North Korea

I thought on the day that is timetabled as the end of the world and the day Kim-Jung Un orders his men to march south, that I'd write a small piece on why David Cameron was wrong about Trident being a good thing going into this possible conflict and why ultimately it doesn't make any difference.

Nuclear weaponry is something that the world wishes it could un-invent. One of the reasons the Allies pushed to coming up with an atomic bomb was just to act as a deterrent to the Axis powers having them and maybe starting the cold war early. The problem was the Germans hadn't the materials or means to deliver such a weapon and little real understanding of what the device would be. One scientist told Feldmarschall Milch of the Luftwaffe that an atomic bomb would be about the size of a pineapple!

When it came to bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki the Allies only dropped the bombs to demonstrate to the Russians the power and awe that they had harnessed. Don't believe the argument that it shortened the war and saved the landing of troops as the USAAF, RAF, RAAF, RCAF and VVS all had enough munitions, aircraft and personnel to blast Japan back to the stone age with a lengthened aerial bombardment, the kind of firestorms and brute force that had been meted out to Germany's cities like Hamburg, Ulm, Dresden and Berlin.

The same is now true for North Korea. The UN and NATO have access to such a vast air fleet of strike aircraft, should North Korea go to start a war then within three days complete aerial supremacy could be attained. Don't be fooled, the CIA has got enough information on North Korea to properly assess their nuclear capabilities and their military strength and locations. This is no Cuban missiles crisis, nor the Balkans tensions in the late 90s when Russia and the West squared off over an airfield.

Nor is this a case of the Eastern bloc facing Democracy. The Warsaw pact powers no longer exist. Only China stands behind North Korea and they would back away should nukes start flying around the place!

Kim-Jung Un's nuclear delivery is really quite limited with only South Korea, Japan and maybe Guam falling in range. Though there are bigger rockets under development that could be used against Australia, Los Angeles and San Francisco they are far from ready.

As for Great Britain's contribution? Well last week David Cameron smugly stated that it was for moments like this it was a good thing we still had Trident.

Really?

The USA still has a massive arsenal of ICBMs and Stealth bombers able to launch from American soil and deliver a nuclear blast into down town Pyongyang.

What would they want our small fleet of submarines for?

England isn't under direct threat and our small amount of nuclear power would be a drop in the ocean compared to what America can fire.

The nation would be better off scrapping an obsolete relic of the cold war and investing the money into our ailing economy and job creation.