I found this image on the internet and I thought some of you might enjoy it.
I think ideally there would be no nukes in the world, because they are dangerous. But nukes do exist. If western countries got rid of their nukes, then the remaining nuclear countries would be able to do what they like. "Surrender to our demands or we will nuke your cities."
Exactly. If Ukraine had their own nukes by the time of 2014, or if they had been part of NATO, then maybe Russia wouldn't have invaded Ukraine.
This reminds me of a discussion I was having with Hexbear members on Lemmy recently.
I was suggesting that perhaps it makes sense for the UK to have nukes, for self-defence against other nuclear countries like Russia, China, and potentially even the US, given their unpredictable behaviour. People from Hexbear got angry at this suggestion. One of them suggested that it's immoral to have nukes because nukes are "threatening civilians".
Maybe the OP image of this thread is right though: megalomaniacs are not deterred by words, but they are deterred by weapons (such as nukes). Ukraine was invaded because they didn't have enough deterrents. Iran is currently being bombed because I suppose they also didn't have enough deterrents.
If the UK got rid of its nukes then we'd just be defenceless against Russia, China, and even the US if the US decides they don't value their old allies (which seems to be the case these days).
It's absolutely possible for the UK to increase its defence spending while also not harming civilians, in the Middle East or anywhere else.
By your logic, no country should have a military, because a military creates a risk of harming civilians. I'm sure that would be great if we lived in a world with no militaries. But then one tyrant could decide he's going to build a military and then he could go and massacre lots of people who wouldn't be able to defend themselves, because they wouldn't have a military.
I think they're two separate issues, because it is perfectly possible for the UK to increase its defence capabilities, while also refraining from attacks upon the Middle East, and refraining from giving support to attacks on the Middle East.
You keep talking about the Middle East. I hope Israel stops its war against Palestine. The UK shouldn't assist Israel's attacks on Palestine. I think Israel has a right to defend itself (and so does Palestine), e.g. with the Iron Dome system, but I don't think Israel should be harming any civilians in Palestine.
I think that's a separate issue from the UK and its allies spending more on defence in order to protect themselves from Russia, though.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were probably wrong (I don't know enough about them really).
In any case I don't think the UK is planning new military action in the Middle East. Starmer recently criticised Israel for its conduct in Gaza. Maybe we will see more criticism from the UK on that topic.
On the topic of Russia though, I think they do pose a threat to Europe. They've been waging war against Ukraine for over a decade now, and senior military figures across Europe think that Russia might try to attack another European country in a few years time.
Your politicians gut everything resembling a healthcare system, education system, energy infrastructure or useful industry, things that would actually allow you to create a healthy, innovative and powerful military.
You seem to suggest that a powerful military is a good thing then. Maybe it is. If Ukraine's military had been more powerful (e.g. if they had been admitted to NATO) then Russia may never have been able to take Ukrainian land, or kill so many Ukrainian civilians.
you will get a small amount of overbudget and late weapons that will be shipped off to kill people in the middle East
I don't believe in the UK harming anybody in the Middle East. I hope the UK doesn't do that. I don't see plans from the UK government that involve harming people in the Middle East with the UK military.
Defending the UK from the threat posed by Russia, mainly.
Defending the UK given the current state of the world is sensible, but I wonder how they'll raise the cash for this
Potentially. I think it depends on how they're used. If a country decides to completely disarm itself though, then it's entirely possible that other countries will seek to invade and subjugate.