Greenpeace campaigner at Faslane nuclear weapons base

As Greenpeace blockades the nuclear weapons submarine base at Faslane in Scotland, campaigner Louise Edge explains what we're doing and why.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• disarmament
• peace
• greenpeace
• trident
• faslane
• scotland
• activism
• arcticsunrise
• nuclearweapons

[wank0r]

How does having the capability of mass destruction actual violence

[GreenpeaceUK]

it's not exactly a statement of peaceful intent.

[GreenpeaceUK]

If you can point to any occasion when Greenpeace has ever used violence against a person, then please do so - only you can't, because we haven't. Greenpeace is founded on the principle of Non-violent Direct Action - no-one is ever allowed to take part in an action without being fully trained in this area.

[anothercrusader]

Once again a handful of minority opinions trying to overule common sense. In a world where the Iranians and middle east are developing their own nuclear weapons, I'm just glad we are updating all the time to be a force - with the common sense not to press the button unless its absoluteley necessary -that has its own solution to possible future conflicts. I'd rather we spent our money there than on increased immigration allowing a back door invasion.

[GreenpeaceUK]

Is that crusader in the George Bush sense? I think your reference to immigration being 'a back door invasion' says a great deal about where you're coming from. And it's common sense to spend £76 billion on Trident renewal when the clearest threat we face is climate change, is it?

[motherlodeuk]

Good for you, mate. You seem to be one of the few commenters on here who doesn't want to shoot anybody who disagrees with them. There is a difference between genuinely necessary defence (ie conventional weaponry) and nuclear missiles (who's only practical use in the world of 'realpolitik' is as an offensive threat). We need to grow up and grow out of our childish need to threaten people and assert our supposed 'superiority' - but still keep our ability to defend ourselves.

[motherlodeuk]

Well actually honouring our own commitments to gradually disarm under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty would be a start, I suppose...

[ToonandBBfan]

FUCK OFF greenpeace. I'd gladly get rid of our nukes if all other nations would follow suit but they wont. That being so its imperative that we retain ours as an effective deterrent. We need tougher laws to deal with these troublemaking arseholes

[ScottishCaledonian]

@GreenpeaceUK limate change has NOTHING to do with Britains nuclear deterant. Why are you talking about climate change ? Ae you implying that because we (may) be going through climate change, that that means there is no threat from hostile nations such as Iran or N. Korea.

YOU FUCKING IDIOT

[lilmissglentoran]

And nicelar leaks and accidents from power stations?

Need a say more? Nuclear energy isn't a toy - it is DANGEROUS! the best way we can deal with this threat is to get rid of nuclear altogether, we'll have problems with waste (although the unpurified uranium will last - it will run out as well) get renewable NOW!!

[motherlodeuk]

to reduce both US and Russian arsenals. The situation is very, very dangerous.

Ohh and as for your crack about 'little groups of people' - here's aquate for you:

"Never doubt that small groups of committed people can change the world. In fact, it's the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Meade

[motherlodeuk]

...these nuclear weapons will not be used in our generation hopefully...

your confidence is touching. What you are missing is that we are committed under the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty to negotiate away our nukes - the danger of these weapons spreading into the hands of people who actually will use tham is greater now than it was at the height of the Cold War. Barack Obama recognises this which is why he's moved so quickly to negotiate with Russia...

[lewisduncan93]

... Thats really stupid, the goverment won't stop and never will to a little group of people. Our country needs the protection to survive.. these nuclear weapons will not be used in our generation hopefully.. what is the chances of us being nuked?

COME ON think about it.. IF it

[majorMcpharter]

World capitalism pits worker against worker factory against factory and nation against nation.This obsolete system is long past its sell by date,and belongs in the trash bin of history.

[Shakeyboat1]

Sorry but when have and when will we have a leader willing to use a nuclear weapon at randam! Trident is only to be used as a last resort when the UK and its people are threatened with total distruction. Trident is just and insureance policy for the next 40 years. considering public spending is at what? 350 Billion a year aprox, 20 billion for Trident is relatively cheap, you can't say that in the next few years we are 100% safe! Permanent members of the UN Security are Nuclear powers council?!

[motherlodeuk]

er, they were focusing on the single most expensive,unnecessary and dangerous element of our military capability - Greenpeace is not a pacifist organisation, just doesn't want some trigger-happy asshole accidentally obliterating the planet...