This is a mad dash to the paleothic, and since nuclear weapons haven’t done the job the Nationalists will try another avenue. Take the ancient flint and carve ourselves ever decreasing tribal territory. Pretend that the politics therein is simply black and white, that the close-knit geography of not a sizeable land mass makes a huge difference to peoples aspirations and values, and where Weapons of Mass Destruction are stored. Make an understandably moral principled case and use this case to muddle the fact a few hundred miles over an arbitrary border makes you really no safer.
Are any of us making a moral case for Nuclear Weapons per se? No. That way lies madness. In nuclear war the true enemy is war itself.
“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” – Albert Einstein (contemplating nuclear War).
Rightful and well justified fears and misgivings, but be rest assured, if Nuclear War is already initiated, we may well have already reached critical mass in terms of destruction.
If any war reaches the stage where nuclear weapons are possibly going to be used, the level of collateral damage where hundreds of thousands of civilians are suffering and dying and significant amount buildings and infrastructure destroyed has probably already been reached by conventional weapons. Quite how conventional weapons offer a better, nicer way of dying and suffering I don’t know..
This is a topic that has been and will be debated time and again, but all this somewhat detracts from the fact the SNP are using it as a prime political tool in the fight to gain independence. Do they wish this to be a prime mover? Because it seems to me to be a moral case rather than a independence prime political one at this stage.
The real prime mover is something else entirely, and it makes me and others here uncomfortable, and nuclear weapons or not won’t change that, no matter how morally dubious or defunct.