I have a cunning plan...

One of the (many) points of disagreement between the coalition partners is over Trident - or rather the question of its replacement. Which got me thinking... You may remember an episode of the comedy series "Yes, Prime Minister" , where the question of actually using our missiles was under discussion and Jim Hacker is presented with a series of escalating scenarios (...the Russians invade West Germany - you press the button? No? OK, the Russians invade Belgium, Holland and France - you press the button? ...and so on...) making the point that it is virtually impossible to imagine a situation in which we would actually initiate nuclear war, so Trident's raison d'être is purely one of deterrence - the so-called MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) approach - if you launch nuclear missiles against me, I will launch mine against you, and although I may be razed to the ground, you will be too. Which means that we don't actually have to have a nuclear capability, all that is necessary is that other countries think we have it. After all, this is a strategy which served Saddam Hussein well for a good many years, even though it backfired against him in the end. So the plan is clear - we announce that we are going to develop Toasting Fork (son of Trident - geddit?) , we debate it in Parliament, we make all the necessary noises and go through all the appropriate motions, but we don't actually do anything, and spend the money instead on other more worthy things. As the meerkat would say - Simples!