Difficult Decisions.

At times of stress, difficult decisions should be made if they are going to have a positive, reasoned long term effect. It does feel as if lately multiple countries have responded to a crisis by potentially making decisions that could exacerbate the situation. Agree or not, military options have been favoured and decisions have been made that appear to echo past mistakes. Arguments have been put forward and acted upon by so many prominent people in power but subsequent countries are going to be put into peril as a result. What worries me, apart from the rise in war propaganda and dependence on military options, is that conflict is often not the best way to achieve peace.

Particularly at a time of financial stress, finding sufficient money to rebuild armed forces and trying to fill in shortcomings for areas that have been neglected for many years is neither positively viable or beneficial. I believe in the short term this will only lead to excessive cutbacks to areas of industry or social care that can not sustain it. Overspends and black holes where the money will simply disappear are both very real problems that associate with panic military investment as such.

Recent decisions to take money from overseas aid is arguably short sighted as human misery is the catalyst that encourages populations to leave their home country and risk all kinds of danger. Immigration is an issue and should be a forethought not an afterthought.

How viable is Trident in the event that a nuclear response should be required? This is a very pertinent query, as a country the UK would have to ask permission from the USA to launch it. If there are increasing conditions and implications for use, how much of a deterrent can Trident be?

I have always thought of Trident as in the story of a man running about in front of Hyde park waving his hands about. When asked what he was doing, he said I am keeping the giraffes away. The reply was but there are no giraffes here. To this the man replied, that was because he had done a good job keeping them away.

In an active nuclear confrontation Trident would have failed and would be little consultation to any survivors. Trident, it could be suggested, is a luxury token ticket just to join the nuclear weapons club. A much better use of money would be to invest the money in conventional arms or a more long term form of defence.

Developing technology that can take over control of drones would be a great step forward or at least blocking the remote control of the weapon and neutralising that threat. Spending precious money should be aimed at innovation as successful defence goes to the most effective use of arms.

Ultimately, budget spending should prioritise promoting peaceful resolutions and achieving long term goals. Preoccupation with military spending and neglect of existing social crises could threaten wellbeing further. A responsible government should take difficult decisions with a perspective that incorporates a greater good and does not simply suit a political agenda.