We don't need no Trident missiles

We don't need no thought control
Hey! Leaders!
Leave those bombs alone!

So there appears to be a consensus that we should keep our Trident submarines with their weapons of hideous destruction. The LibDems say fewer; the Tories say keep the same number (I believe we have four, at least one of which is eternally cruising the oceans at a cost of over £1 million per week) Hardly anyone seems to be saying: why have any at all?

Let's have a look at a few other advanced, wealthy countries who appear to manage to survive without any nuclear submarines at all: Germany, all the Scandinavian countries, Brazil, Canada. I could go on. The point is, all these countries operate successful economies, have their voices heard at the highest level in the World community, yet do not seem to be clammering for the right to inflict megadeath upon any perceived threat.

So in the absence of any specific threat, the communist world having gone phut decades ago, why are we so desperate to retain our nuclear option? The answer is simple: ego. We like to think of ourselves as still being a first division world power, punching well above our weight in world affairs and that our nuclear deterrent secures that position for us. It doesn't. Mind you, if we led the nuclear club in our determination to rid ourselves of these expensive and essentially useless weapons, our prestige on the world stage would be enhanced enormously. But no, we'd rather pretend we're big players in the playground where no one (except America of course) is going to boss us around- or we'll nuke 'em, right?

Wrong...