It’s a MAD World


Viikko 1


Date: Apr 16th, 2013
Motion: THB that the EU should acquire centralised nuclear weapons for protecting its member states
Role: MP (opp.)

The problem with the European Union  EU member states have never been inclined to use force of any kind against any enemy, not even when the minion would have been the USA, an often trigger-happy ally. The EU does not have offensive tendencies nor even defensive willpower, even if firepower.

The problem with nuclear power at large  Researchers at the CERN and its new-fangled particle collider have had continuous problems in trying to find that elusive ”bozo named Higgs”. At power plants, nuclear power has had a bad record on its safety in unusual circumstances, and there is the eternal question regarding the safe burial of the used-up uranium and other by-products. Fukushima happened, and has not yet ended. In Finland, the building of the country’s nth reactor has been a prolonged agony. There is still no end in sight to the project. In consequence, nuclear arms, as belonging to the class of ABC arms (atomic, biological and chemical weapons) — today known as Weapons of Mass Destruction — are enveloped in the verdigris of time. Why? Well, I’ll tell you.

The parable with Margaret Thatcher  Nuclear arms are exactly the same thing as Thatcher’s career. They span the same rhetoric, trends and years. Thatcher was born in 1925, around the same time nuclear research got under way and into results in Germany and the US. Thatcher was elected from Finchley, North London, to the House of Commons in 1959, when nukes were starting to proliferate. Thatcher became PM 20 years later, in 1979, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Her reign lasted for the duration of the Eighties, during which time nukes became unfashionable, having cast a pall over the lives of an entire post-war generation. She resigned in 1990. The oblivion of nukes was marked by 2004, when Ms Thatcher got dementia and Ronald Reagan, her keen ally, who had suffered from Alzheimer’s, died. She herself died on Apr 8th, 2013, and her funeral is tomorrow. Such should be the funerary procession of nuclear weapons as well. And do you want to know the funniest bit when it comes to this debate? The stumbling block of Thatcher’s career was the European Union — and so should the EU be in this case of ours as well when it comes to nukes or nuclear weaponry.

The problem with nukes  Nukes can not be used against either a small or a big enemy. With small ones, they lead to overkill and massive collateral damage. With big ones, they lead to mutually assured destruction, traditionally abbreviated as MAD. Also, modern wars occur between lesser entities than nation-states. Threats come from amorphous and decentralised hubs of insurgency and subversion.

With these words, I would advise you to reconsider the said motion ”This house believes that the E.U. should acquire centralised nuclear weapons for proctecting its member states”. Thank you.

Arvio: Edustajapuheeksi tämä on tarkoitustaan vastaamaton. Siinä käydään läpi yleisiä asioita, joita voisivat käydä yhtä hyvin läpi puolensa ensimmäinen tai viimeinen puhuja. Lyhytkin tämä on. Uutta ainesta edustaa kolmas kappale valtionpäämiehettärestä Maggiesta. Puheen keskinäinen vuo asiasta toiseen on kuitenkin hyvä, varsinkin puolessavälissä puhetta.



Täytä tietosi alle tai klikkaa kuvaketta kirjautuaksesi sisään:

Olet kommentoimassa -tilin nimissä. Log Out / Muuta )


Olet kommentoimassa Twitter -tilin nimissä. Log Out / Muuta )


Olet kommentoimassa Facebook -tilin nimissä. Log Out / Muuta )

Google+ photo

Olet kommentoimassa Google+ -tilin nimissä. Log Out / Muuta )

Muodostetaan yhteyttä palveluun %s