MAY I respond to the two letters. These two people are advocating is that we give the bomb to every country in the world thus making the world ultra safe. I think there is a flaw in this argument, don’t you?

During the Cold War our defence policy on using the bomb was that if Russia invaded Europe we would bomb Germany. The fact that this would have destroyed Europe’s agricultural system and, at best, returned us to the Stone Age and that is ridiculous. These weapons, if used, have the power to destroy mankind on the earth but have not got the power to destroy the world.

If these letter writers can remember Chernobyl they should understand that not only is Russia still suffering from that atomic explosion so is this country and Europe. People will be dying from cancer caused by that disaster which wasn’t designed to kill people but to produce electricity. Japan likewise is still suffering from its disastrous explosion again designed to produce electricity not kill people.

The only reason politicians want the bomb is that it allows them to sit on the Security Council at the UN. That is a very high price for the British people to pay. Also, the French have the bomb so we must have it but let’s look at the countries that don’t feel threatened and haven’t got the bomb.

Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, the list is endless so why do we feel so threatened? Perhaps it’s because we interfere too much in other countries’ problems.

To quote two famous men, Roosevelt said ‘The only thing we have to fear is fear itself’ and Winston Churchill’s famous quote ‘Jaw-jaw is better than war war’. So for once in the words of John Lennon ‘Give peace a chance’ and prove to the world that we can live without the atomic bomb. What we do need is a larger conventional force and of course a navy with the capability of flying aircraft from our carriers. I rest my case.

Ian Greenhalgh

Smithills,

Bolton