If Scotland Declares UDI..........
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Livingston, Scotland
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The non-nuclear question. A difficult circle to square, and all the more so given the employment impact of the Clyde submarine bases.
But does the SNP stance on nuclear weapons differ markedly from that of Denmark, which has been used in the Scottish press as an exemplar (if that's the right word) of how a separate Scotland might develop as far as defence is concerned?
But does the SNP stance on nuclear weapons differ markedly from that of Denmark, which has been used in the Scottish press as an exemplar (if that's the right word) of how a separate Scotland might develop as far as defence is concerned?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having read the contributions here I can safely say that I haven't seen so much mince since the BBC showed several skip-loads of the stuff during the horse meat scandal.
The sneering contempt which apparent die-hard Unionists on this thread show towards their so called fellow countrymen is almost palpable.
I recon if I were to link this thread on a Bitter Together website/discussion forum as an example of how citizens in other parts of the UK value Scotland's continued membership of it, the ratio of those in Scotland in favour of continuing that relationship would probably drop from the current level of 2:1 to something nearer 1:2.
So post the next GE, should 'Call Me Dave' find himself with a majority of 10 in the House of Horrors and calls, as promised, for an In/Out referendum on the EU, will we see those same contributors to this thread pitching up to claim that the people living in the UK "did not ask for it"? Aye right!
God help the Welsh if Scotland does vote Yes for they'll be on the receiving end of all this sh!te until such time as they follow the Scots and (majority of) the Irish in deciding on a spot of DIY, for better or worse.
It'll certainly be interesting watching the remainder of the 'UK of Whatever' either turn its bigoted attention in upon itself in a game of rich South versus poor North or, alternatively, upon those poor sods across the North Channel stuck between a rock and a hard place. Perhaps being outwith the EU will once again open up the French and Germans to even more of a verbal hand-bagging than the Great Margaret herself achieved.
Can't wait to see which way that little scenario plays out...
The sneering contempt which apparent die-hard Unionists on this thread show towards their so called fellow countrymen is almost palpable.
I recon if I were to link this thread on a Bitter Together website/discussion forum as an example of how citizens in other parts of the UK value Scotland's continued membership of it, the ratio of those in Scotland in favour of continuing that relationship would probably drop from the current level of 2:1 to something nearer 1:2.
So post the next GE, should 'Call Me Dave' find himself with a majority of 10 in the House of Horrors and calls, as promised, for an In/Out referendum on the EU, will we see those same contributors to this thread pitching up to claim that the people living in the UK "did not ask for it"? Aye right!
God help the Welsh if Scotland does vote Yes for they'll be on the receiving end of all this sh!te until such time as they follow the Scots and (majority of) the Irish in deciding on a spot of DIY, for better or worse.
It'll certainly be interesting watching the remainder of the 'UK of Whatever' either turn its bigoted attention in upon itself in a game of rich South versus poor North or, alternatively, upon those poor sods across the North Channel stuck between a rock and a hard place. Perhaps being outwith the EU will once again open up the French and Germans to even more of a verbal hand-bagging than the Great Margaret herself achieved.
Can't wait to see which way that little scenario plays out...
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We just need the Scots (and then the Welsh) to vote for independence... and then run an election for unification of Scotland, Eire, and Wales into a Celtic Republic.
Kluseau,
Is the Danish stance still ‘…if a vessel visiting Denmark has nuclear weapons on board we will be okay about that as long as we don’t actually know for sure that there are nuclear weapons on board’…? Not exactly the same as being a Non-Nuclear Country I would have thought.
Denmark signed up to the NATO Strategic Concept of remaining a Nuclear Alliance at the Lisbon Summit. Would Scotland do the same at a future summit?
Rab-k,
I had hoped what you thought was sneering contempt by some on here was meant to be humorous (if stereotypical) banter. We are all in the same boat, rudderless and going against the tide at times no matter how hard we paddle.
I guess we all get the political leadership we deserve because the system is out of date and ultimately flawed. Is it a true democracy when you vote for a person who represents a party when you disagree with some (but not all) of that parties manifesto? That’s not much of a choice.
The average bloke doesn't form party policy but has to decide which bunch of untrustworthy power-hungry creeps to support based on whether he can tell truth from fiction during an election campaign. It is highly unlikely that anyone actually agrees on everything ‘their’ party promises to do, when they “come into power”.
So if Dave gets to stay after the next ‘spin doctored power poll’ just how many people who voted for ‘him’ wanted all his policies (i.e. EU in/out).
People may well have the right to say that they ‘did not ask for it’ (of any policy) as the policies were presented as a whole – take it or leave it. Where’s the ‘choice’ in that? The ‘haves’ will continue to shaft/ignore the ‘have nots’ regardless of nationality. Steak or mince?
Is the Danish stance still ‘…if a vessel visiting Denmark has nuclear weapons on board we will be okay about that as long as we don’t actually know for sure that there are nuclear weapons on board’…? Not exactly the same as being a Non-Nuclear Country I would have thought.
Denmark signed up to the NATO Strategic Concept of remaining a Nuclear Alliance at the Lisbon Summit. Would Scotland do the same at a future summit?
Rab-k,
I had hoped what you thought was sneering contempt by some on here was meant to be humorous (if stereotypical) banter. We are all in the same boat, rudderless and going against the tide at times no matter how hard we paddle.
I guess we all get the political leadership we deserve because the system is out of date and ultimately flawed. Is it a true democracy when you vote for a person who represents a party when you disagree with some (but not all) of that parties manifesto? That’s not much of a choice.
The average bloke doesn't form party policy but has to decide which bunch of untrustworthy power-hungry creeps to support based on whether he can tell truth from fiction during an election campaign. It is highly unlikely that anyone actually agrees on everything ‘their’ party promises to do, when they “come into power”.
So if Dave gets to stay after the next ‘spin doctored power poll’ just how many people who voted for ‘him’ wanted all his policies (i.e. EU in/out).
People may well have the right to say that they ‘did not ask for it’ (of any policy) as the policies were presented as a whole – take it or leave it. Where’s the ‘choice’ in that? The ‘haves’ will continue to shaft/ignore the ‘have nots’ regardless of nationality. Steak or mince?
Last edited by HAS59; 29th Apr 2013 at 23:04.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HAS59 - I was under the distinct impression that the term, "Sassenach" as used by my grandfather, referred specifically to anyone of English birth and descent.
I gather the word has it's origins in "Saxon", as to define English people as a totally different group to Celtic groups - and essentially an enemy, or a lower class than the Celts.
My grandfather was fluent in Gaelic and my mother remarked how he was once called upon to interpret for some Irish navvies employed in Edinburgh, who spoke no English; and to whom, work instructions from the (English-speaking) foreman were unable to be communicated.
Urban Dictionary: sassenach
Saxons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (see Celtic languages)
I gather the word has it's origins in "Saxon", as to define English people as a totally different group to Celtic groups - and essentially an enemy, or a lower class than the Celts.
My grandfather was fluent in Gaelic and my mother remarked how he was once called upon to interpret for some Irish navvies employed in Edinburgh, who spoke no English; and to whom, work instructions from the (English-speaking) foreman were unable to be communicated.
Urban Dictionary: sassenach
Saxons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (see Celtic languages)
While not disputing what ontrack's Grandfather personally meant by the term, it would appear that sassenach can also mean a Lowland Scot:
Definition of Sassenach | Collins English Dictionary
Sassenachs - definition of Sassenachs by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
Dictionary of Difficult Words - sassenach
As for the concept of whether the people of Scotland "asked for a referendum on Independence", one can debate that until the cows come home. Yes, it was part of the SNP manifesto, so some would argue that, as they are the party in power, then the people voted for it. However, as is the case with many governments in recent years, and despite a reasonable attempt to produce a system which uses proportion representation, the SNP won by polling less than 50% of the vote (about 45% in fact). One could therefore equally well argue that, since 55% of the people voting didn't choose the SNP, then the people of Scotland didn't vote for a referendum of Independence. That's without even mentioning how many of the Scottish people didn't bother to vote at all, which drops the SNP's mandate to around 25% of those eligible to vote.
I'm not picking on the SNP in particular here, for many years the UK government has been formed by a party winning with about 40% of the vote from those that could actually be bothered to turn out.
However, that discusion is largely irrelevant. We are where we are. Have the "rules" for this referendum, in terms of winning margin, been decided yet? Will a 50.05% vote for Independence, vs 49.95% vote to maintain the status quo, result in an Independent Scotland. Does the "Yes" vote need to exceed a certain figure, whether that be 60%, 66%, ..... etc? Or has that little nicety not been decided/announced yet?
Definition of Sassenach | Collins English Dictionary
Sassenachs - definition of Sassenachs by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
Dictionary of Difficult Words - sassenach
As for the concept of whether the people of Scotland "asked for a referendum on Independence", one can debate that until the cows come home. Yes, it was part of the SNP manifesto, so some would argue that, as they are the party in power, then the people voted for it. However, as is the case with many governments in recent years, and despite a reasonable attempt to produce a system which uses proportion representation, the SNP won by polling less than 50% of the vote (about 45% in fact). One could therefore equally well argue that, since 55% of the people voting didn't choose the SNP, then the people of Scotland didn't vote for a referendum of Independence. That's without even mentioning how many of the Scottish people didn't bother to vote at all, which drops the SNP's mandate to around 25% of those eligible to vote.
I'm not picking on the SNP in particular here, for many years the UK government has been formed by a party winning with about 40% of the vote from those that could actually be bothered to turn out.
However, that discusion is largely irrelevant. We are where we are. Have the "rules" for this referendum, in terms of winning margin, been decided yet? Will a 50.05% vote for Independence, vs 49.95% vote to maintain the status quo, result in an Independent Scotland. Does the "Yes" vote need to exceed a certain figure, whether that be 60%, 66%, ..... etc? Or has that little nicety not been decided/announced yet?
Last edited by Biggus; 30th Apr 2013 at 04:05.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Why oh why would I wanna be anywhere else?
Posts: 1,305
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Oh dear. It's not looking good 
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
THE campaign for an independent Scotland had a fresh setback at the weekend when a poll showed 60 per cent of Scots think neither First Minister Alex Salmond nor his Scottish National Party has made a convincing case so far.
The YouGov poll for the pro-union Better Together group shows 62 per cent of more than 1000 respondents said the case was either "not very convincing" or "not convincing at all".
More than a fifth of those respondents had voted for the Nationalists in parliamentary elections.
The YouGov poll for the pro-union Better Together group shows 62 per cent of more than 1000 respondents said the case was either "not very convincing" or "not convincing at all".
More than a fifth of those respondents had voted for the Nationalists in parliamentary elections.
Can't wait to see which way that little scenario plays out...
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People living in Scotland did not ask for the “Braveheart Opinion Poll” – but as it was what the SNP were going to do anyway we were left with little alternative, as a slim majority apparently considered all the other parties were worse. That still doesn’t make it a good idea or ‘the will of the people’. Okay I know democracy isn’t perfect.
And remember; not all SNP voters want independence just like not all Labour voters want the Union. So, given how everyone voted and the fairly large number of people who do want independence, the only sensible way to settle it is with a referendum.
Whether independence is a good idea or not is a different debate (and probably not one for this topic).
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would personally doubt that there would be a majority vote for Scottish secession, despite the efforts of the secessionists. The inherent costs of maintaining a smaller separate country would weigh heavily on Scottish people individually.
I would see the greatest gripe from the Scots as the lack of local input into decisions affecting Scotland, being the main driver in the secession argument.
However, this could easily be countered by Britain offering some devolvement in British Govt decision making, towards the Scots.
I don't think there's much difference in Scotlands cry for secession, as there was in Western Australia's drive for secession in the 1930's. In 1930, Sir James Mitchells W.A. Govt was elected on a platform of secession.
W.A., as always, was producing the major share of Australia's wealth in the form of gold, wool and wheat - and considered it was getting a rough deal from the Federal Govt. A referendum in 1933 saw West Aussies vote more than 3 to 2 in favour of secession.
A petition to the British Parliament requesting independence was rejected on the basis that only a Commonwealth could petition for seccession - not an individual state.
The W.A. secession move was stopped in its tracks, as there was no way the Australian Federal Govt was going to agree to it.
W.A. would have had a tough time on its own, trying raise its own defence forces, Navy, and all the necessary Govt adminstration, plus utilities such as power and communications - for what was then, a population of about 440,000 people. However, perhaps the great mineral wealth of the State might have supported independence; it's hard to say.
In the case of Scotland, I don't see where the country has adequate reserves of national wealth to prop up its independance.
Manufacturing? You have to compete with the Chinese today.
Coal? Hmmm, seems like coal is on the nose as far as fuel goes, and much Scottish coal is difficult and costly to mine.
Oil & Gas? Well .. unless there's a major discovery, no, I can't see that being a major, expanding future industry. The existing O&G industry in Scotland is pretty static.
That leaves tourism. Yes, Scotland is a nice place to visit - for 4 months of the year, unless you like plowing through snow drifts.
My mother left Scotland in 1928 because she saw no great future for herself there. Life was very hard in both Britain and Scotland in the 1920's, much more so than in Australia at that time.
I believe she certainly lived a better life overall, in Australia, and she never wanted to return to Scotland to live. I don't think a great deal has changed in the intervening 85 yrs.
I would see the greatest gripe from the Scots as the lack of local input into decisions affecting Scotland, being the main driver in the secession argument.
However, this could easily be countered by Britain offering some devolvement in British Govt decision making, towards the Scots.
I don't think there's much difference in Scotlands cry for secession, as there was in Western Australia's drive for secession in the 1930's. In 1930, Sir James Mitchells W.A. Govt was elected on a platform of secession.
W.A., as always, was producing the major share of Australia's wealth in the form of gold, wool and wheat - and considered it was getting a rough deal from the Federal Govt. A referendum in 1933 saw West Aussies vote more than 3 to 2 in favour of secession.
A petition to the British Parliament requesting independence was rejected on the basis that only a Commonwealth could petition for seccession - not an individual state.
The W.A. secession move was stopped in its tracks, as there was no way the Australian Federal Govt was going to agree to it.
W.A. would have had a tough time on its own, trying raise its own defence forces, Navy, and all the necessary Govt adminstration, plus utilities such as power and communications - for what was then, a population of about 440,000 people. However, perhaps the great mineral wealth of the State might have supported independence; it's hard to say.
In the case of Scotland, I don't see where the country has adequate reserves of national wealth to prop up its independance.
Manufacturing? You have to compete with the Chinese today.
Coal? Hmmm, seems like coal is on the nose as far as fuel goes, and much Scottish coal is difficult and costly to mine.
Oil & Gas? Well .. unless there's a major discovery, no, I can't see that being a major, expanding future industry. The existing O&G industry in Scotland is pretty static.
That leaves tourism. Yes, Scotland is a nice place to visit - for 4 months of the year, unless you like plowing through snow drifts.
My mother left Scotland in 1928 because she saw no great future for herself there. Life was very hard in both Britain and Scotland in the 1920's, much more so than in Australia at that time.
I believe she certainly lived a better life overall, in Australia, and she never wanted to return to Scotland to live. I don't think a great deal has changed in the intervening 85 yrs.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...which drops the SNP's mandate to around 25% of those eligible to vote.
But no political system is perfect. We can only work with the system we've got unless we vote to change it. Changing it can improve things, but make other things worse. Given that most agreed to have the voting system that we do have, we all therefore agree that the system in place decides who can do what. We can't then simply change the rules when it doesn't suit our argument.
I would see the greatest gripe from the Scots as the lack of local input into decisions affecting Scotland, being the main driver in the secession argument.
However, this could easily be countered by Britain offering some devolvement in British Govt decision making, towards the Scots.
However, this could easily be countered by Britain offering some devolvement in British Govt decision making, towards the Scots.
Last edited by baffman; 30th Apr 2013 at 17:31.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Africa
Age: 87
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proxy Voting
Baffman,
During my service time, I too had a Proxy Vote, this proxy was with my father.
One time, I was home on leave over an election. So I rocked up to cast my vote, to be informed by the jobsworth at the desk that I couldn't vote, as I was a registered 'Service Voter'.
It took a little forceful arguing on my part, to bypass the said jobsworth and to see her superior jobsworth and actually mark my cross.
During my service time, I too had a Proxy Vote, this proxy was with my father.
One time, I was home on leave over an election. So I rocked up to cast my vote, to be informed by the jobsworth at the desk that I couldn't vote, as I was a registered 'Service Voter'.
It took a little forceful arguing on my part, to bypass the said jobsworth and to see her superior jobsworth and actually mark my cross.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Age: 56
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rab-k
The sneering contempt which apparent die-hard Unionists on this thread show towards their so called fellow countrymen is almost palpable.
I rather hoped the irony in my response would have been transparent in so much as it was fairly clear (to me anyway) CM was purely pi $$ taking and merited a flippant response. One of the things we Scots do well is laugh at ourselves and I make no apology for doing that.
My wish for Scotland to remain part of the union hardly amounts to "sneering contempt" for those who disagree. You have your opinion, I have mine.
For me this has never been about whether Scotland 'could' be successful post independence, I have no doubt at all it is capable of that. It's more about 'should' we do it and I think we have a better future as part of the UK.
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Australia (Perth)
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps they need a Scottishness exam. Multiple choice, of course.
1. Which of these is/are a great Scottish musician(s):[INDENT]a. Andy Stewart
be rest are rubbish.[/SIZE]
2 d, but there were lots of French, Irish, English, Germans and Austrians too.
3 b, clan tartans invented by the English (apparently), whisky invented in Italy, Haggis invented in Rome.
4 b, obviously.
5 d, obviously.
1. Which of these is/are a great Scottish musician(s):[INDENT]a. Andy Stewart
be rest are rubbish.[/SIZE]
2 d, but there were lots of French, Irish, English, Germans and Austrians too.
3 b, clan tartans invented by the English (apparently), whisky invented in Italy, Haggis invented in Rome.
4 b, obviously.
5 d, obviously.
What a load of bile this is, Courtney you must be particularly well balanced with the size of those chips you are carrying mate. A typical whinging pom. Haven't followed the independence thing for a while but now of the mind to say Scotland go for it - high time you dropped the baggage of these outdated little Englanders. Visited the UK lots over the past years and always found the celtic nations to be by far the more hospitable - England has no real sense of itself. So go for it Scotland let the whingers down south carry themselves.
At the beginning of time God was discussing the creation of the world with the Angel Gabriel. Leaning back in His golden throne, He told him of His plans for Scotland.
"Gabriel," said God, "I am going to give Scotland towering mountains and magnificent glens resplendent with purple heather. Red deer will roam the countryside, golden eagles will circle in the skies, salmon will leap in the crystal clear rivers and lochs, and the surrounding seas will team with fish. Agriculture will flourish and there will be a glorious coming together of water with barley to be known as whisky. Coal, oil, gas - all will be there. The Scots will be intelligent, innovative, industrious and......."
"Wait a minute!" interrupted Gabriel. "Are you not being just a wee bit too generous to these Scots?"
But the Almighty replied, "Ah, but here is the sad part - I haven't told you yet who their neighbours will be!"
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok I stand by to be corrected but I believe the colour scheme of the RAF roundle has nothing to do with the Union flag. The colours were chosen as the reverse of those used by the French who had adopted use of the roundle as a visual identifier before us. Apart from that why waste money and effort changing it, it ain't a national symbol.
Last edited by TomJoad; 30th Apr 2013 at 19:48.
Straight out of Wikipedia, Tom. The roundel's colours were chosen because of the national colours, the reversal of the order of the colours was to distinguish it from that of the French. A subtle, but important difference. So it is the national colours.