'To declare that nuclear weapons are either ideal or a deterrent is incorrect'

The CND gesture of floating tea lights down the river, while not having achieved its ultimate aim, is at least aesthetic, and it is impossible to say how much it stimulates onlookers to support CND.

I too, have not been canvassed on the CND cause, but I will have to assume that the CND ‘s alleging that four in five local residents oppose Trident has some basis of accuracy.

To declare that nuclear weapons are either ideal or a deterrent is incorrect.

How can weapons of mass destruction be ideal? Makes no sense. And how many countries do not possess or wish for nuclear weapons but get on with their day to day business undeterred? Many of these are developed countries that could afford them, but choose to use their cash elsewhere. The deterrent argument is false not least of all because deterrents are based on a willingness to use them. Does Mr Baldock advocate nuking ISIL?

Mr Baldock conveniently says nothing of the moment, during the Cuban missile crisis, when we were at the brink of mass destruction. Nor the many instances of near catastrophic accidents. Risks worth taking?

It could well be that the majority of the Labour Party hierarchy are pro-Trident. If Mr Corbyn becomes their leader the reverse party line will be towed.

Our period of relative peace since the Second World War has been achieved not least by the existence of the European Union.

Long may it last, and long may CND remember and promote its cause.

BOB LYNN Whaddon