Why Scottish independence - no. 1

When Ukraine was part of the USSR it had the second largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world. Only the United states had more. Now it is an independent country and it is nuclear free. It has achieved this as part of the struggle for independence. Here is a lesson for Scotland.
Trident is one of the most devastating weapons of mass destruction ever invented. I believe nuclear weapons to be immoral. These missiles and the submarines that launch them are located in Scotland. The missiles and warheads are stored in underground silos and bunkers on the beautiful hillside above Helensburgh overlooking Holy Loch, near Faslane naval base. The warheads are regularly carried through my home town of Stirling in a military convoy to take them for reprocessing (or whatever has to be done to service them).
The cost of the weapons has been astronomical. The billions to replace them are part of the British government's long term defence strategy. 
The referendum on independence offers a huge opportunity to galvanise the widespread public opinion that thinks that the possession of such devastating weaponry is totally immoral. Getting rid of this system is a very good reason to vote for Scottish Independence. I do actually believe that there are many other reasons why independence is a good idea but removing Trident from our shores is a clincher for me. 
There are already many parts of the world that are nuclear free. Africa became nuclear free by the treaty of Pelindaba in 1996; Southeast Asia by the treaty of Bangkok in 1995; the South Pacific, New Zealand and Australia by the treaty of Rorotonga in 1985 and the whole of South America by the treaty of Tlatelolco way back in 1967.
There is widespread condemnation of Trident through Scottish civic society - from the churches, the Islamic community and the trade unions. If getting rid of trident really is a priority for all these people then there is only one way for them all to vote in the referendum and that is YES!

I acknowledge the influence that Brian Quail's article in "Coracle" Autumn 2012 has had in galvanising my thinking on this subject.

(Image courtesy of Darren Robertson / FreeDigitalPhotos.net)

Postscript  3rd November 2012
Support for getting rid of Trident came from an unlikely source this week.....
"Former Tory Defence Minister Michael Portillo gave a damning verdict on Britain's nuclear weapons programme on BBC This Week. In response to the question "Should Trident be renewed?", he replied "No, I think it is all nonsense". Then when asked "Should we have any kind of nuclear deterrent?" Portillo said, "No, it's completely past its sell by date. It's neither independent, because we couldn't possibly use it without the Americans, neither is it any sort of deterrent, because now largely we are facing enemies like the Taliban and Al Quaeda, who cannot be deterred by nuclear weapons. It's a tremendous waste of money. It's done entirely for reasons of national prestige and at the margins it is proliferation". In contrast, Labour MP Tessa Jowell said that the Labour Party supported Philip Hammond's plan to spend millions of pounds on Trident replacement, in advance of the formal decision to proceed with this the new system in 2016."