Did you watch "British guide to the end of the world" last night?

Absolutely fascinating and very worrying.
All about the development of our atomic bomb in the 1950s and its testing in the Pacific at Christmas Island and how hundreds of British servicemen were shipped out there to face the eventual consequences of the test explosions.
They were told to sit with their backs to the blast, cover their eyes with their hands, and all this whilst wearing only their shorts, shirts and jungle hat.
And then in the years afterwards they suffered illnesses, cancer and any children they had were riddled with illness and cancer too.
Doctors didn't know how to treat it because they'd never faced it before.
In those days the world was only a very small step away from destruction.

 

Even worse....
The small and unassuming village of Skipsea in East Yorkshire narrowly escaped a catastrophic fate during the Cold War nuclear arms race.
It seems incredible today to think that the coastal parish between Bridlington and Hull was once considered as a site for atomic weapons testing by government scientists.In 1953, nuclear experts at the Aldermaston laboratory in Berkshire were casting around for a remote area of the country to detonate a prototype warhead as they battled to keep pace with the technology being developed in the Soviet Union and the USA.
A former military bombing range at Donna Nook, off Lincolnshire's North Sea coast, was also rejected, and attention turned to Skipsea. The place, too, was sparsely inhabited, and the RAF had recently closed a wartime base in the area, allowing for an easy land purchase should it be necessary. Local outrage gathered pace when the plans became public knowledge, and the area's MP lobbied the government to reconsider - even citing the destruction of 'bungalows and beach huts' among his concerns.Opposition was such that the authorities eventually backed down, and agreed with Australia that British weapons testing could instead take place Down Under. Four fission bombs were detonated in a remote site in 1956, after the resident Aboriginal population had been relocated.

It was later revealed that had a blast occurred in Skipsea, the fall-out would have contaminated a large area of the country and could have even spread to northern Europe.!!!!

One of the reasons I have always considered that, whilst science is responsible for all most of the good stuff we have in life, I never fully trust 'scientists'

 

I drove past the Maralinga site, part of the Woomera Prohibited Area in South Australia, on my solo Red Centre trip in 2008. I flew to Alice and then drove to Adelaide (about 3,000 Kms), stopping, hiking and visiting places along the way. There's still warning signs and you cannot turn off the road to this day.

 

I think its just generally people, not just scientists, where the blame lies.

 

Watched a similar documentary about a town inAmerica where testing was done amazingly it is only recently that the USA government have started to concede some illnesses were linked to them.

 

As a young un growing up in the 50s n 60s I was well aware of the threat of nuclear war and the Cold War. Not Being particularly into politics. Was the reason I voted in 75 to join the EU. For a safer Europe. That was still a concern as to why I voted to stay at the last vote, but not the only reason. For the future of my kids and grandkids.

 

And to think there are thousands if not millions of people who criticised Jeremy Corbyn for not wanting to detonate a nuclear bomb on a whim

 

It's the UN who have made it a safer Europe. There was no EU in 1975 just a common market. If it had stayed that way I dont think we'd have had any referendum on Brexit.

 

The "Common Market" was never a thing. It never existed. It was a phrase used during the first referendum, but it never existed as a "thing".

 

Noooo!!!

That’s where me Dad’s got his caravan!

 

May not be exact in the terminology. But Britain joined the European community ( labelled common market in Britain) in1973. A referendum took place in 1975 to gauge support and ratify the decision to stay or leave the EC Was My first ever vote as an 18 year old. 67% voted to stay. A not legally binding vote by the way but was accepted as such. In the aftermath of the second world war the European Union was set up with the intent of ending wars between neighbors. The UN has played a major part but is not solely responsible for peace within Europe.

 

I think you're getting the EU and the UN mixed up . The UN was set up after WWII to maintain peace and try to prevent war. The EU or rather the EEC didn't come into being till 1958 and was set up purely for trade and other policies.

 

As others have stated it was the EEC European Economic Community we joined (often referred to as the 'common market' and it solely was about trade agreements . It gradually evolved and grew into the political behemoth that is the European Union including the creation of a single currency that is the bone of contention for many. Much of what we have now was not envisaged when we joined (belatedly after initial attempts were blocked by the French)

 

I watched it, also dealt with civil defence and gov advice. I spent a short time in the forces in the mid eighties and believe me, you'd probably have been better off wiped out straight away. Incidentally, the EU didnt become an interlocuter in its own right until the Lisbon treaty signed in 2007. As a representative of community of countries It had meddled ineffectively in the Balkans conflict which was finally ended by punative NATO action against Serbia. That there was peace in Europe post war had much more to do with NATO, the defence policy of MAD and the (since emerged) fact that the Russians were no where near as capable or willing to mount an attack as had been thought.
BTW in response to one poster about the EU, I voted to leave for the safety of my children in part because I believe that PESCO (EU defence intergration under the Treaty of Aachen) has the ability to undermine NATO.

 

No problem Simon it's just the way I read the information on line to try and remind myself of the timelines. And the reason I chose to remain in the community/union. The in depth the report is quite interesting . Taken from the history of the European Union.
I am aware of the UN and it's set up and reasons. But as seen in the statement below. The EU was not set up purely for the reasons you describe. The EEC was born out of that union to take things further re trade etc. So in my eyes they are linked. May be wrong but that's how I see/saw it at the time.

A peaceful Europe – the beginnings of cooperation

1946 | 1947 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1951 | 1952 | 1953 | 1954 | 1955 | 1956 | 1957 | 1958 | 1959
A peaceful Europe – the beginnings of cooperation
The European Union is set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbours, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace. The six founding countries are Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. The 1950s are dominated by a cold war between east and west. Protests in Hungary against the Communist regime are put down by Soviet tanks in 1956. In 1957, the Treaty of Rome creates the European Economic Community (EEC), or ‘Common Market’.

The historical roots of the European Union lie in the Second World War. Europeans are determined to prevent such killing and destruction from ever happening again. Soon after the war, Europe is split into East and West as the 40-year-long Cold War begins. West European nations create the Council of Europe in 1949. It is a first step towards cooperation between them, but six countries want to go further.

9 May 1950