The Reader: Spending on nuclear weapons is pointless

Lieutenant Commander Lester May [“Defence spending is a first priority”, The Reader, October 17) is right. Genuine security, by no means only a military matter, ought indeed to be a high national priority.

This is why spending so much money on a new generation of nuclear weapons is so stupid.

Why? Well, they will not even be independent. We will have, as with the present Trident fleet, to borrow the missiles on which to put our new warheads from the United States.

The only reason why anyone would even dream of spending such massive amounts of money on nuclear weapons, and not on real needs like the NHS and education, is national vanity. It is time we grew up.

Bruce Kent

Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

EDITOR'S REPLY

Dear Bruce

It won't surprise you that I disagree. I was involved in the decision to replace Trident. If we could have avoided spending tens of billions of pounds we would have done so — money was in short supply. But we looked closely at cheaper nuclear weapon alternatives, and they don’t exist. I also considered whether we could dispense with them altogether.

But despite the best and well-meant efforts of people like yourself, the number of nations who have acquired or are close to acquiring this lethal technology is growing. In a world where Russia, China, India, Pakistan all have nuclear weapons, are we really so confident we could never be threatened by any of them?

Having got rid of them, it would take at least 20 years to reacquire them. You may be optimistic about what the world looks like in 2038. Sadly, I am less so.

George Osborne, Editor-in-Chief

Pricey burgers are just a fad food

One of the top guilty pleasures consumed in London is a burger, as mentioned in [“You are where you eat: secrets of our takeaways”, October 18], and I do not understand why.

I would suggest that it is the result of the prevalence of the Starbucks equivalents of burger eateries such as Byron and Five Guys. Burgers are nothing more than a fad food like macaroons, cupcakes and burritos.

I pity the people who believe that paying nearly £20 for a bit of unflavoured meat in a soggy bun is worth it. It’s not.

George Smyth

Royals: something to be proud of

I believe Alfie Mullen is in the minority [“Royalty should be a thing of the past”, The Reader, October 17]. As a nation we don’t have many things to be proud of these days, but our royal family is top of that ever decreasing list. To say there is no need for royals sweeps hundred of years of our history under the carpet and is bonkers.

Trevor Pritchard

Why should one family have a monopoly on the position of head of state in perpetuity?

Cyril Meadows

Don’t run away, just improve the EU

I agree with much of Matthew d’Ancona’s excellent article [“The more chaotic Brexit becomes, the more I back calls for a people’s vote”, October 17].

Few, if any, believe the EU is perfect, but the response should be to work on improvement, not running away. In the event that disaster is averted and we remain in the EU, we must take greater care in selecting our representatives, ones who will actively defend UK interests.

Adrian Danson