PfP Fighting for Climate Jobs means:

Spending/Jobs = greenhouse gases must mean we have to spend on jobs in the short term on the projects that will save greenhouse gases in the medium to long term.

Therefore, national infrastructure projects: HS2, trams like Metro, Sprint buses jobs do not meet this urgent golden rule. Nor does building, demolition, rebuilding jobs.  Nor do spending/jobs on luxuries, like above.  Nor, spending/jobs on Trident and armaments for our wars in Yemen, Afghanistan ...

Nor does built-in obsolescence jobs with even more waste and very high greenhouse gas emissions for yet more overconsumption - one of the main drivers of global destruction and ecocide.

"This legal defence for the 3 Trident Ploughshares 2000 peace women ... " ALASTAIR MCINTOSH October 2001

This legal defence for the 3 Trident Ploughshares 2000 peace women argues that in British constitutional theory, military defence is the ultimate responsibility of a monarch who is both Commander in Chief of the armed forces and, by divine grace, “Defender of the [Christian] Faith.” Such implied theocracy sits in a framework of Scots constitutional law where, contrary to the English position, the Community of the Realm, and not Parliament, is Sovereign under God. God’s legal recognition is further emphasised by Scotland’s primary constitutional instrument within the United Kingdom, the Treaty of Union, 1707, and it is alluded to in the schedule to the Church of Scotland Act, 1921. 

Additionally, Lord Stair (like Blackstone in English law) affirms that divine law is the foundation and context within which Scots law develops. It follows from this that British military defence policy as it affects Scotland ought to be consistent with Christian principles. Such principles were taught by Christ as pacifism, but accommodated by most of the mainstream churches as “just war theory.” However, both stances - pacifism and “just war” - refute genocide as being ultra vires.

Nuclear weapons are, of course, potentially genocidal, which is why they are opposed by the mainstream Scottish churches which do not, otherwise, adopt a pacifist position. To destroy the infrastructure supporting nuclear weapons is therefore consistent with a citizen’s duty to prevent a greater crime from being perpetrated. Within Christian tradition, the precedent for such preventative destruction was established by Jesus turning over the tables of the money changers in the temple.

Set in such a context we can see that these three women are not criminals: they are stalwart upholders of law and order. Their work of witness calls us back to the constitutional nature of the British state that we are in. They remind us to raise ourselves up to our nation’s God-given higher vocation and to turn our backs on those “fallen” faces of nationhood that would traditionally have been called “sin,” such as possessing weapons of mass destruction.

Andy Street inspires this meeting!

I'm really copying the mostly well attended 'Ask Andy' meetings that Mayor Andy Street holds around the West Midlands.  I'm trying to whip up more interest in politics and what our politicians and their professional officers and experts are doing in the region.  In particular, I would like church goers, atheists and agnostics to think about the morality of what is being done in our name - whether it is £1.38 billion to 2026 of WM Metro trams to replace buses and trains, the over £2 billion for the 87 Kms Western Orbital Motorway, the £55.7 billion for HS2, the £3 billion of arm sales to Saudi Arabia in the first 18 months of the war with Yemen (CAAT), £7 billion for two sitting duck aircraft carriers that now need more billions for a flotilla of warships to protect them when out at sea and, £100 billion to replace Trident WMD.  YET,  a struggling, a poorly endowed in some areas NHS with some shortages, growing homelessness but large homes being built for the well heeled.  AND, the more we spend the less we have and the more damage we do to our life support systems.

Our three speakers are well worth hearing.  Mark Dowd, in particular, is a most articulate, engaging, well thought of public speaker who is always goes down like a bomb with audiences (non violent bomb, of course).  He is on our side - the side of the poor, the disadvantaged and vulnerable and, on the side of the climate.  He will be the grand finale to the meeting.  I, personally would welcome good natured, humorous heckling and other contributions from the floor.

PURPOSE OF 28 NOV PUBLIC MEETING

I'm really copying the mostly well attended 'Ask Andy' meetings that Mayor Andy Street holds around the West Midlands.  I'm trying to whip up more interest in politics and what our politicians and their professional officers and experts are doing in the region.  In particular, I would like church goers, atheists and agnostics to think about the morality of what is being done in our name - whether it is £1.38 billion to 2026 of WM Metro trams to replace buses and trains, the over £2 billion for the 87 Kms Western Orbital Motorway, the £55.7 billion for HS2, the £3 billion of arm sales to Saudi Arabia in the first 18 months of the Yemen civil war (CAAT).  £7 billion for two sitting duck aircraft carriers that now need more billions for a flotilla of warships to protect them when out at sea and, £100 billion to replace Trident WMD.  YET,  a struggling, a poorly endowed in some areas NHS with some shortages, growing homelessness but large homes being built for the well heeled.  AND, the more we spend the less we have and the more damage we do to our life support systems.

Our three speakers are well worth hearing.  Mark Dowd, in particular, is a most articulate, engaging, well thought of public speaker who is always goes down like a bomb with audiences (non violent bomb, of course).  He is on our side - the side of the poor, the disadvantaged and vulnerable and, on the side of the climate.  He will be the grand finale to the meeting.  I, personally would welcome good natured, humorous heckling and other contributions from the floor.

Quotable Quotes

Sir Michael Fallon  Today  11 May 2013:

"If you have armed forces, you have to be prepared to use them."

If you have WMD, you have to be prepared to use them, too.  Just as Theresa May said soon after becoming PM in 2015 when asked if you she would be prepared to strike back with Trident missiles if the UK was attacked.  She said, 'Yes'.  She was either lying or mentally unstable in adding to the destruction and radiation in making a retaliatory attack to further wipe out even more of every kind of life on Earth.

Churchill was in full agreement with the use of chemical weapons in the World War, part One.  He was also wanting to use them in the Middle East and in India between the wars.

The 'defence' budget is to grow by 0.5% every year from the present 2% of the nation's gross income.

We have to carry on growing come hell or high water.  Just like cancer does in our bodies!

Is Christian discipleship meant to embrace non-violence, justice and actually doing what Christ taught?

Doing our duty to Queen and Country; doing total discipleship to our God, JC1

Thinking about our nation's recent military interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, is there one verse in one of Paul's letters that has a bearing on those trouble spots?  And another as, perhaps, a slight corrective to that one?  What could I be thinking of?!

What would be the mind of Christ in those situations?

How then does that apply to our own Christian discipleship?  Should it affect how we vote, how we write to or, even visit, our MEPs, MPs and councillors?

Hi Tim,

Thanks for all these thoughts on walks etc - we will look forward to seeing you by 9am Friday - we will bring our own lunch and so be ready for the off.

re: your thought for the day, your question about the 'mind of Christ' is a really good one; unfortunately He doesnt offer any soundbites on Afghanistan, Iraq, the Labour leadership etc!!!! (No soundbites but much teaching in the Gospels, Acts and in Paul's letters, don't you think, Peter?)  So we have to rely on the big picture of scripture as a whole I think.  Both the Old Testament and the gospels were written during tumultuous times politically and socially  from slavery in Egypt, warring nations, constant attempts to stamp out the people of God, the failure of the Jewish kings to meet expectations etc;. In the NT there is the total occupation and dominance of the Roman empire with all the injustice and inhumanity that accompanied it.  The apostle Paul made good use of his Roman citizenship and was not, of course, rebellious or revolutionary.  Unlike our Western governments and the public opinion that allows them to be so.  But only when it comes to weaker countries who can't hit back (apart from with terrorism).

When it comes to Romans 13 v 1-7, my commentary has: "The Christian and the state.  Though the Christian has no right to punish (12 v 19-21), the state does have that right and the Christian must respect it.  Paul's confidence that the Roman state is, on the whole, just and beneficent is matched in 1 Peter 2.13-17; 3.v13."

How is the mind of God and of his Messiah expressed? Constantly reconciliation with God through his Messiah is the theme, BEFORE reconciliation with our neighbour is possible. So the sermon on the mount (which most people take as great advice for life) is all about mourning our sin, hungering for God and His righteousness, seeking peace with God first, and only then can we live in our messy world loving our neighbour in need.

So I cannot expect a world that doesn't live under the lordship of Christ to follow his way any more than the OT Israelites, or NT believers could expect those around them to do. Should those who do live in the lordship of Christ follow His (non-aggression) way, however difficult or costly?  That doesn't mean I shouldn't do 'all the good I can to all the people I can just so long as I can', but I think it suggests that the main witness of Christian believers is to enjoy living under the lordship of Christ.- enjoying his world, his peace, his forgiveness, and do all I can to be reconciled with my 'neighbour'.

This may not be what you wanted to hear, as you are still in'campaigning' mode, but I think our world will remain messy until Christ comes again !!  But our own little, individual world should have the minimum mess (or hypocrisy) in it.

Every blessing Tim, and thanks again for all the prep for our time away.

Peter.

This has been sent only to you, Les but is one reply to what Peter wrote on the back of the sheet I gave you yesterday.

You are right.  It is campaigning but, as I see it, it is also, for me, doing my duty to Queen and Country and discipleship to my God (JC1).  "Give to Caesar those things that are Caesar's and to God those things that are God's."

I think, this kind of patriotism puts Jesus Christ first and is also in line with His Spirit that cannot possibly be about overthrowing foreign governments.  In this century alone, these have been Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria.  Last decade, our friends and allies (and our fellow believers) in the States had seven countries as part of their Project for the New American Century.  All to be overthrown to become democratic and American compliant.  All contrary to Titus 3 v 1 and Romans 13 - being submissive and obedient to rulers and authorities.  Especially, the Spirit of Jesus cannot be about bringing democracy down the barrel of a gun, as all three main political parties we vote for believe and do.  My pastor, Les Hardwick, told me that the corrective to complying with the wishes of the authorities is the verse in Acts, "Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than men' " Acts 5 v 29.

Therefore, should Christian believers be voting for the main political parties who do war around the world, to try and keep Western compliant governments in power or, use military might to protect their vital strategic interests?  "Not by might, nor by power but by My Spirit says the Lord of hosts" Zechariah 4 v 6.

​Tim

Hi Tim 

Thank you for your e-mail in which you raise some very difficult questions.  In Matthew 24v6 Jesus said "You will hear of wars and rumours of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed.".He also spoke in chapter 25 of the need to look after the poor and hungry v 31 to 46.

The question of voting  has to be answered according to our own conscience accepting that someone else will act differently while following their own conscience. Not voting can open the door to  even worse forms of government     (there was a time when I would not vote.)

In September 2002 (15 February 2003) over one million people marched in London protesting against the war against Iraq, the war still went ahead!  The 1950s,saw many protests against  weapons of mass destruction, nothing has changed.  There seems little we can do! but we can feed the hungry, welcome the stranger, try to overcome poverty and vote for the party which seems most willing to tackle these issues!

Les

Thanks v much for these thoughts.

We need a much higher profile given to non violence, constraint not coercion, a new determination to eschew aggression, power, domination, colonialism, empire building, forcing our ways (and wars) on others.

A new determination to allow religious and political toleration, equality, justice tempered with mercy instead of constant punishment and revenge.  A rejection of hypocrisy in too much unethical foreign policy and the closure of Guantanamo Bay.  A rejection of the all out war on Gaza that our side perpetrated in July and August of 2014.  A rejection of lying that allows some of our political leaders to say, "Of course, I will press the nuclear button" to send much of humanity to kingdom come.  Obscene riches to allow, with Trident, such disgusting behaviour by our leaders and, when poverty and inequality is so rife too!

"What we sow today we will reap tomorrow".  Mayhem, instability, civil war in the Middle East is now spreading, with revenge attacks, to our own Western nations that are bombing, missiling Syria and Iraq - and, for many more years to come.  Nearly all the politicians we vote for have unleashed the dogs of war, opened the Pandora's Box, well and truly stirred up a hornet's nest of anger and hatred against Israel and the West.

I must come round today to get the meter reading that Places for People want today.

Every blessing

Tim

West is Best; Russia is really Rough and the Muslims very evil, Mad and Mistaken!

Do you agree that Russia feels uncomfortable with the EU and NATO, seeming to them, to be right up against their border?  Is this understandable to you?

The West attacks other countries and has done, off and on, for centuries, as part of our Western European nations' empire building exploits.  Right now, we are attacking Islamic State.  Are Russian planes and drones also joining in the fun of killing humans with no fear of casualties for them, too?

Ukraine, in the Cold War, was fully part of the USSR - like the three Baltic states.  Am I correct in understanding that more of a pro-Russian Ukrainian president, than a pro Western, was fairly elected?  That he was ousted from power in February 2014 after anti Russian, pro European protesters were shot dead by the security forces and by snipers?  This seems to have prompted Putin to take back Crimea that USSR had given to Ukraine in 1954.  Is that correct?  The takeover seems to have been a very popular move with the Crimeans.

What we do is turn eastern Europe, except Crimea and eastern Ukraine, into our domain by welcoming them into our European sphere of influence, then into the EU and, later, into NATO.  No wonder, Russia is apprehensive and, possibly, more patriotic and nationalist than it has ever been.  Nine (or ten)former eastern European satellite states of the USSR are now in the EU and three of them, the three Baltic states, are part of NATO.  The other seven are:
Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia.

1. The 28 EU countries are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the UK.12 Nov 2014

There were six USSR aligned countries in the Cold War: 
Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland and Romania.  The six created a wide buffer zone along Russia's eastern border.  All are now part of the West by virtue of being in the EU.  The three Baltic states that were part of the USSR, are in the EU and NATO.  No wonder, Russia and Putin were/are anxious to keep Crimea and eastern Ukraine under their sphere of influence.

Even our media use the term, 'Russian backed separatist rebels', rather than the Russian Army fighting in eastern Ukraine.  If it had been us, we would have been in there with a fully fledged army, navy and air force attacking the country we had picked on - as we have done for every single year for the last 101 years, at least, according to the 'Guardian' four page spread on 12 February 2014.

The West is Best and must always dominate, control and expand its sphere of influence.  The West, with our talk of a EU Army to face up to aggressive Russia, is convinced we are superb with our democratic voting system that the mistaken Muslim countries must also do - down the barrel of a gun: our gun.  It is not that the West is arrogant; it is just that we are always so right and Russia and the Arabs are always so wrong.  We cannot help but be always so right, for it is in our nature so to be!

According to Google search:

Formerly Communist countries (by current name):

• Formerly part of the Soviet Union: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
• Other Asian countries: Afghanistan, Cambodia, Mongolia, and Yemen.

Six former Soviet republics that are part of the EU's Eastern Partnership Programme, according to Radio 4 News on 22 May 2015:
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine.
The programme is to help the six strengthen their links with the West.

Current Communist Countries: China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam.

Not even Russia is a current Communist country, for it has embraced Western capitalism.  Yet, we have turned Russia into our no 2 enemy, after Islamic State as no 1 enemy.  Both terrorist states are now used to justify our threatening much of humanity with annihilation with Trident.  It must now, definitely, be replaced with four subs, say our militaristic, malevolent, immoral friends.

Upping the anti; more militarism; and, Western warring with more Trident

For me, it's immoral and unacceptable to threaten to wipe out much of humanity with these Western weapons. We used them twice in 1945, too and that was a spur to the Soviet Union also getting the ultimate WMD. And, we can't blame the Muslims for this barbarity that also sets them a very bad example.

Rethink Trident - and our persistent warfare in every year for the last 100 (no exaggeration)!

Trident is too destructive to be of any practical use.
It's a white elephant of white elephants.
It cannot possibly stop the UK from being attacked since plenty of other countries don't have this magnificent weapon of war but, have either NOT been attacked by anyone or, been attacked by us!
The countries with the biggest and most impressive arsenals of war, do the most aggression against weaker counties.

We have every right to execute evil terrorists, whenever we like. So there!

Very many thanks, Tom for all these thoughts of yours, particularly for the following that I do think is true:

"It seems to me that we as humans are a warring breed. The human race has warred with each other since we were created and throughout our evolution. I'm going back to biblical times and Well before. Wars generally speaking are largely about territory, retaining our way of life and reclaiming territory we believe to have been taken from us. Another factor is the need for world domination. Muscelling in on others people's territory and way of life. As a result, people have had to defend themselves against aggressors in order to defend their territory and ways of life which they have worked hard to build."

At its height, the British Empire had world domination of about one third of the known world.  We went to war on 4 August 1914 to make clear to upstart Germany who was the world's ruler - US.  And, now, we remain the world's ruler with the full support of the USA with whom we are in tandem!

Just because we have an innate​ instinct for revenge and violence does not mean we should give in to those instincts.  Should we not have more self-control and resist all our aggressive urges?

I do think that we all have to be far less gullible; far more sceptical about whether it really is necessary, let alone ethical and legal for us to attack other countries.  Don't trust the politicians when they tell us we must go to war.  We should think things out for ourselves.  No blind obedience, please!

It now seems that our declaration of war on the 4 August 1914 was premature, when Germany never had any intention of invading the UK nor, at any time during the four years.  The German leaders wanted to control more European territory, certainly.  (One hundred years on, Germany is now the respected and acknowledged leader of the European Union under Angela Merkel, a right wing politician who is liked by both Europe and Russia.)  We should have lived up to our nickname of 'perfidious Albion' and, yet again, broken our outdated 1839 treaty with Belgium and, secondly, refused to go to the aid of France when she was attacked.  Unthinkingly tying ourselves to an alliance with France and going to war 100 years ago when we had a small professional army (100,000 in the UK), and no conscription was sheer stupidity.  We were very lucky to get away with it - and nearly did not!  Unfortunately, one-sided disarmament and reparations and folly was seen with the Treaty of Versailles in 1919.  Even our former Tory leader, Ian Duncan Smith believes that it led to the rise of the Nazis and the 1939 war.

Hence, one 20th century, European, Christian war that led to world war because all these Christian nations had their own colonies all over the world.  And we, clean living Brits were the worst offenders, with the biggest empire ever seen in the history of humanity.  All this, in direct contravention with what our Founder said and did in His temptations before his public ministry!  Every British monarch, for centuries, had been commanded in their Coronation to submit themselves to the "living oracles of God" (the Bible).  Our forbears betrayed Christ and, His life and teaching.  Our Christian nation has engaged in warfare in every single year, ever since (1914).  Shameful!

Now, it seems, our Judeo/Christian based nations are wanting to exterminate every single member of Islamic State.  As if they could!  Israel is engaged in exterminating every member of Hamas by drones that we build, here in the West Midlands (Stafford)  As if Israel could ever bring about such complete slaughter.  We fully support Israel in killing cold blooded murderers without the delay and cost and inconvenience of judicial process.  Never any sanctions against our good friend, Israel.  Then, we bulldoze their homes as further punishment.  We then get all indignant when they try and kill us Brits and Israelis, whether it is in Muslim lands or in our own lands!

For every single year for at least the last one hundred years (Guardian 12.2.2014) we have persistently shown violence to expand our territories or to hold them.  Now, we are reaping what we have sown over our military interventions in the Middle East - more violence from those we have attacked.  In addition, with yet more nuclear weapons as we replace Trident at the cost of £100 billion of irreplaceable resources and gruesome greenhouse gases.  As if a fleet of submarines can stop the rise of Islamic State in Muslim majority Syria and Iraq!  One nuclear warhead from one sub, could wipe out most of humanity.  But that is what most of the electorate think is a very good idea indeed - if it comes to it!

Just because Christian believers, Muslims and the rest are so aggressive and violent, does that give the rest of us an excuse for being equally violent and aggressive, Tom?

Conscience is my god.  But for the children of Abraham (Jews, Christians, Muslims who all have the same God with three names), this is heretical.  At Zion Christian Centre last week, I heard Jeff Lucas, a Christian leader, speaker and author, downplay the importance of conscience as not being adequate when God's Laws and His Will are pre-eminent!

In short, international law and the UN Charter allows nations to defend themselves but not to be aggressors and to attack other nations, as we do.  Therefore, I am not a pacifist although, like Christ, I do believe in non-violent direct action and passive resistance.  Therefore, for me, the COs were the real heroes between 1914 and 1918.  All the others were badly hoodwinked by the politicians who preached patriotism, nationalism and militarism - and the people gladly swallowed the lies.  The politicians told us to: 'Be silent.  Consum​e.  Die.'  Exactly what happened to so many of them.

Scotland's independence might just cut England down to size - but I doubt it!!

Scotland: Stop subsidising England's excesses.  Get your independence, Scotland!

I know that, from the opinion polls, Scotland distancing itself further from England seems a hopeless cause.  However, for what it's worth, these are my:  interesting/alternative/tendentious/horrifying/warped (delete as you wish)
thoughts on why I think Scotland would be sensible to separate from England and be its own sovereign nation within the EU and UN instead of the UK.

The big-hearted Scots* are subsidising London as the hub of the UK with continuing plans for Heathrow expansion, the very expensive Cross Rail and Thames Link project that opens in 2019 and, last year's London Olympics.

After more than one hundred years of an "essentially a Victorian rail network" (Chief Executive of Network Rail, Sir David Higgins on 8 January 2013 on the 'Today' programme), England has decided, rather late in the day, to modernise it, with the Scottish taxpayer helping to foot the bill.  Does Scotland have even one Victorian signal box?  England has 500 dating back to Queen Victoria and 300 are 1960s vintage! (same interview)

The Scots subsidised HS1 and, now, they generously help us out with HS2 that, again, gets nowhere near Scotland, even when fully completed.

Scotland should be most upset at subsidising England's armed conflicts on 23 nations since 1945 (Radio 4's 'Thought for the Day' slot in the 'Today' programme.  Repeated, on another occasion, without disagreement from the other team members, by the Green Party panellist on Radio 4's 'Any Questions').**

No doubt, there are some in the English Defence League calling for pre-emptive, unmanned drone attacks of self defence on the Muslim militant extremists before they kill another of our brave soldier heroes.  Heroes home in barracks, on leave from protecting the people of Afghanistan from the real killers.  Scotland should disassociate itself from this barbarity by no longer funding England's unappreciated occupation of, and drone attacks on, foreign lands (a total of thirteen years, in punishment for 9/11, when we finally leave Afghanistan in 2014).

Scotland provides a most convenient haven for England's submarines carrying its independent nuclear deterrent. The Clyde Trident workers might be redeployed in future proofing your nation from the accelerating, enhanced greenhouse effect and the exhaustion of the planet's oil and gas reserves. The subs and nuclear missiles might be sent off to Barrow to give employment to the English, who will be left with digging a little deeper into their pockets with the Scottish taxpayer no longer bailing them out.

With independence, Scotland would no longer be contributing to the very many billions of pounds for the replacement for the Trident subs. Preliminary work on the replacement began when either Tony Blair or Gordon Brown was PM.

Scotland's power from water, wind and sun could be used just for themselves or sold to the English at great expense! A golden chance for you Scots to become Great Scot - instead of the phrase being used simply as an exclamation! Great Britain, minus Scotland, would be just a little less 'Great' and a little less able to act, in tandem with the US, as the continuing great power and policeman around the world to get its way.

We English, have such an over-inflated view of our importance to the nations of the world, that we cannot possibly do without Scotland to enhance our prestige and weight! Without Scotland, how can we possibly continue to punch above our weight in the world?  Even more crucially, the US might not regard us quite so highly with only little Wales and littler N Ireland in tow.  Our special relationship might be that little less special without Scotland.

For us English, all this independence malarkey is diminishing our size and greatness. Great Scot, it might even threaten our place as a permanent member of the Security Council. We certainly can't have that!

Let Scotland raise its own taxation for its own spending - that is all independence is - like the fifty other countries that have gained their independence from London since 1945 "and not one has expressed an interest in coming back under London's control." Alex Salmond on 21 May 2013 on 'Today'.

I think, Scotland's taxation is essential for England to continue to fund her excesses; it also makes her also responsible for the UK's most unfortunate, aggressive, domineering and provocative foreign policy in Muslim lands.  That certainly is an excess, to put it mildly!

Tim Weller

* "Over the last thirty years, in every single one of these last thirty years, Scotland per head contributed more in taxation than the UK average.  So that does indicate the financial and the potential financial strength goes over a long period of time."  Alex Salmond interview on the 'Today' programme, 21 May 2013.

** "Since 1946, the UK has engaged in more armed conflict than any other country with a total of 23 if you include Libya.  Do we conclude from this that we are a nation of warmongers or, a country that values peace and justice?"  Rhiddian Brook on Thought for the Day on 25 March 2011.

Continuous at-sea deterrent

" ... can my right hon. Friend confirm the absolute centrality in his thinking of the fact that we need to maintain a continuous at-sea deterrent?" James Morris MP

" Dr Fox: I have absolutely no problem in agreeing with my hon. Friend about the importance of continuous at-sea deterrence." Secretary of State for Defence

Our continuous at-sea deterrent, the Trident submarine, is essential for a great superpower and sea power that we always have been and always will be. We only, in the last fifty years, graciously and generously gave away the biggest and longest lasting empire in the history of the world and, therefore, we need to continue to punch above our weight.

The UK is as important as the US, of course and, as they have a continuous at-sea deterrent, so must we. We are the unofficial 51st state of the USA, we have a special relationship with them that means what they do we must do. Our big friend always knows best and we must continue to follow where they lead. We can't have some well-meaning types saying that we should think for ourselves and be independent of the USA.

In addition, of course, our continuous at-sea deterrent has prevented war and attacks on our land since the 2nd World War. Our continuous at-sea deterrent impresses our enemies like al Qaeda and the Taliban and shows them what a rich and muscle flexing and aggressive nation we are. We deserve to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council, for ever - thanks to our power and might in the world, reinforced by our continuous at-sea deterrent.

After all, we can't have the UK becoming like Norway that is notorious for its diplomacy and peace-mongering in attempting to settle the wars between Israel and Palestine and the recently ended violence in Sri Lanka.

The religious and political right is invariably wrong, hypocritical and inflamatory!

Our right wing governments and electorates love to assume that we are going to be attacked at any time. We love to have enemies, too. Both help to justify our armaments, our aggression and our attacks. Tough, hard, bellicose stances by our leaders always attract the love of the electorate and their votes. Our most outstanding post-war prime ministers have been our great war leaders, Churchill, Thatcher and Blair. Eden is discredited. His right wing Conservative Party Cabinet who, with France and Israel attacked Egypt, failed to get the agreement and support of the USA and so lost the war.

For 63 years, the right in the US/UK/Israel first invented and used, and then maintained the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world. The right wing democracies soon made the Bomb too destructive to be of any practical use. Yet, even so, our side came the nearest to using them in 1962 after our side provocatively put Jupiter missiles in Turkey near the border with the Soviet Union - our number one enemy. The political and religious right wingers worked hard to persuade Kennedy to use nuclear weapons - for a second occasion being the first to use them. A more right wing, Republican president, might not have resisted their demands to nuke the evil, Communist Russians.

Our side has always been the most bellicose in word and deed in attacking countries with Communist rulers or, governments with militant, Islamic tendencies that refuse to behave like we do in the world. Well, when you have all earthly power, of course might is right and you have a duty under God to make other nations as blessed and democratic and as Christian as yours!

Our side has tried hard to make more user friendly battlefield nuclear weapons that could be of practical use in our wars around the world. We have always made the running in finding new ways to spend our one-off wealth on ever more sophisticated and wonderful conventional and nuclear weapon systems, eg Polaris to make us independent of the US, Cruise missiles, star wars, renewing Trident - and all when the US is our best and closest buddy; and, the only country with whom we have a special relationship.

We don't believe in balance - only imbalance in favour of the US, UK, Israel! The other side gets it in the neck from our invasions, attacks and occupations if the other side, our enemy, try and correct the imbalance to make for less aggression by our side. Our behaviour around the world in attacking countries without nuclear weapons, sends the powerful signal to them that they must have the Bomb to prevent them from being attacked - and attacked by us; us who are always right and righteous and well intentioned and always know what is best for everyone else!

Our right wing electorates in the world's super-power bloc, love hard, tough, warring leaders to throw their weight about and to command the love and respect of the electorate. Democracy means war, aggression and war crimes - even from 1945 - by the great, outstanding and upstanding democracies! Right is wrong - for both our right wing political leaders and the right wing Christians who are right in there, whispering encouragements in their ears.

Might is right for the right, who are always right and blessed of the Lord. They are the righteous of the Lord, after all!