Scottish Defence Force?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wander00
There is absolutely no reason why a (Re)Unionist party should not and will not be established and stand candidates in the Scots parliament.
There is no reason to deny the perfect democratic right of any group to advance its cause through peaceful political means and no-one really expects the existing Tories to disappear entirely anyway.
This is about democracy after all. For all.
So wind it back in, please or take such casual racism and ignorance, whether wilful or not, to Jet Blast where it belongs.
which I am sure they would not afford the "Better Together" faction, were the decision be "yes".
There is no reason to deny the perfect democratic right of any group to advance its cause through peaceful political means and no-one really expects the existing Tories to disappear entirely anyway.
This is about democracy after all. For all.
So wind it back in, please or take such casual racism and ignorance, whether wilful or not, to Jet Blast where it belongs.
Last edited by piesupper; 13th Sep 2014 at 02:21. Reason: add entirely
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no reason to deny the perfect democratic right of any group to advance its cause through peaceful political means
Going back to the thread, without a cohesive defence policy, talk of the force structure for iScotland is a bit premature.
As the Daily Telegraph pointed out, an independent Scottish Defence Force can only inherit equipment currently in use by the MOD.
So, for example, an independent Scotland might decide it only needs a relatively cheap, lightweight air defence fighter, such as Gripen or F-16. However, all they can inherit is Typhoons, which may be more expensive and complicated to operate (I'm not belittling the capabilities of any future ScAF staff here!) than they require. Similarly a Type 23 Frigate may be more than they need, but it's the only game in town for now.
So, for example, an independent Scotland might decide it only needs a relatively cheap, lightweight air defence fighter, such as Gripen or F-16. However, all they can inherit is Typhoons, which may be more expensive and complicated to operate (I'm not belittling the capabilities of any future ScAF staff here!) than they require. Similarly a Type 23 Frigate may be more than they need, but it's the only game in town for now.
engineer(retard) wrote:
What else can be expected from a National Socialist Party? 
It seems that any party that wants to exercise that democratic right to speak to the people gets shouted down and abused. If the people don't want to listen they can walk away; if they do want to listen they should have the right to hear without some screaming nut job bellowing obscenities and abuse. What is happening now is not democracy.
an independent Scottish Defence Force can only inherit equipment currently in use by the MOD
Which is why, IMHO, the SNP/Yes Campaign are still confident of getting a currency union. They clearly believe they "have" something that the rUK desperately needs or wants but won't "give it up" unless they get a CU. Again, this could be Trident, a share of the oil revenue etc. All very simplistic, and probably quite childish, but that seems to have been the nature of this whole referendum (from both sides).
While there might be a hidden bargaining agenda, I thought the stated counter to not getting currency union was refusal to take on any of the national debt.
It occurs to me that the national debt has already been spent. It has accrued over many years in a variety of ways, including government spending in Scotland on infrastructure, roads, schools, hospitals, paying benefits and the wages of government employees, etc.
The SNP seem to expect their "share" of defence assets. If they don't intend to take their "share" of the national debt, will they be returning, dismantling, destroying all the assets in Scotland that the national debt paid for, including asking Scottish employees to return a portion of their salary.
Or is that too simplistic?
As for swapping a "share" of defence assets for say cash, in order to go out and buy say a few Gripens, while it has the merit if getting the kit you actually want/need, presumably it will create further delays in actually fielding anything, while contracts are let, equipment procured/built if new, etc?
It occurs to me that the national debt has already been spent. It has accrued over many years in a variety of ways, including government spending in Scotland on infrastructure, roads, schools, hospitals, paying benefits and the wages of government employees, etc.
The SNP seem to expect their "share" of defence assets. If they don't intend to take their "share" of the national debt, will they be returning, dismantling, destroying all the assets in Scotland that the national debt paid for, including asking Scottish employees to return a portion of their salary.
Or is that too simplistic?
As for swapping a "share" of defence assets for say cash, in order to go out and buy say a few Gripens, while it has the merit if getting the kit you actually want/need, presumably it will create further delays in actually fielding anything, while contracts are let, equipment procured/built if new, etc?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
interesting idea retard - we INSIST they take their fair share of all the dross we have
X % of the House of Lords
Y% of the Royal Family (starting with that Scots supporting Princess Anne)
A% of government IT professionals
B% of Union Leaders
C% of journalists...... what a list it would make!!!
X % of the House of Lords
Y% of the Royal Family (starting with that Scots supporting Princess Anne)
A% of government IT professionals
B% of Union Leaders
C% of journalists...... what a list it would make!!!
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even though I can't stand this tabloid comic, this article is an exception. It contains facts and figures (well, figures) of what the proposed Scottish Defence Force would consist of. I wonder what Typhoon sqn would be handed over?
Salmond demands £10bn tartan army: Ships, jets, helicopters, troops...they're all in SNP's sights if Scotland votes Yes | Mail Online
Salmond demands £10bn tartan army: Ships, jets, helicopters, troops...they're all in SNP's sights if Scotland votes Yes | Mail Online
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Assuming Wee Alec reneges on the National Debt. Scenario; offices of IMF. Scottish Finance Minister asking for a loan.. "Well, we've no currency, no central bank, no lender-of-last resort, we're running a current account deficit, Oh, and by the way, we've just reneged on 5 billion of debt. Givvus some money" Yeah, sure.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Ignoring equipment, these 2000 personnel he expects, will they be Scots or seconded? Would seconded get benefits like LOA and duty free, for surely they would want some compensation.
If the transferred are Scots, would they have the right skill sets.
How about training? I expects he would expect a given number of slots in all the different training schools and probably for free in compensation for not getting bits of simulators, bricks, mortar and supplies.
To expect a Scots regiment to go 'home' when those based in foreign parts (Yorkshire) have been denied the vote. I wonder if that is a deliberate ploy so that the Referendum can be declared void?
If the transferred are Scots, would they have the right skill sets.
How about training? I expects he would expect a given number of slots in all the different training schools and probably for free in compensation for not getting bits of simulators, bricks, mortar and supplies.
To expect a Scots regiment to go 'home' when those based in foreign parts (Yorkshire) have been denied the vote. I wonder if that is a deliberate ploy so that the Referendum can be declared void?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontius... The right thing to do, is have a trawl for volunteers. Surely they are not going to force Servicemen to move to a foreign defence force against their wishes? It would be like saying "you lot choose to join the RAF but we've gave you away to the Basutoland Airforce and you're now part of them".
If you're going to criticize their policy please at least have the decency to read the defence section of their white paper - it's widely available on the internet.
Their plan is to look for volunteers, both Scottish and non-Scottish, to move across to a Scottish defence force. If you want to criticize their plans that is a major point to pick up on - evidence indicates that there appear to be very few people interested in moving across, so the plan fails immediately on that aspect. Let alone the complex issue of getting the right trades and numbers you require, for example, if the SDF were to needs 60 pilots to man it's fleet, and 60 RAF/FAA/AAC helicopter pilots volunteer, things look good, until you try and man your multi-engine and fast jet fleets!
Their plan is to look for volunteers, both Scottish and non-Scottish, to move across to a Scottish defence force. If you want to criticize their plans that is a major point to pick up on - evidence indicates that there appear to be very few people interested in moving across, so the plan fails immediately on that aspect. Let alone the complex issue of getting the right trades and numbers you require, for example, if the SDF were to needs 60 pilots to man it's fleet, and 60 RAF/FAA/AAC helicopter pilots volunteer, things look good, until you try and man your multi-engine and fast jet fleets!
Who is to say that the volunteers would be released from their RAF,Navy or Army service anyway? If they fit the needs of their respective service and are of a high calibre I've no doubt the Service wouldnt just hand them over.
It will be an interesting exercise.
It will be an interesting exercise.
Am I alone in finding the Indy question and the way matters are going totally bizarre?
If it were not for the fact that Yes would cost the "UK less Scotland" a fortune, I would wave goodbye to the Scots and even press a few bob in their hands to poke off.
And what on earth is "the rest of the UK" to call itself? I have always said/written "English" when occasion arises.
But collectively and severally we "Brits" seem to have lost our marbles, while the world laughs.
I need a drink [not whisky].
If it were not for the fact that Yes would cost the "UK less Scotland" a fortune, I would wave goodbye to the Scots and even press a few bob in their hands to poke off.
And what on earth is "the rest of the UK" to call itself? I have always said/written "English" when occasion arises.
But collectively and severally we "Brits" seem to have lost our marbles, while the world laughs.
I need a drink [not whisky].
If Scotland (not the SNP, which is the mistake made here and elsewhere) votes Yes, independence will kick in long before any relocation of Trident. Immediately, Western Europe's main nuclear deterrent will be located in an independent, non-NATO country. A bargaining chip? Like or loathe Alex Salmond, he's got more political nous than Cameron, Miliband and Clegg put together.
At the moment, I'm voting No. I don't have enough information to vote for such a radical change. But I understand the Yes argument. There is another argument up here that runs like this. One cannot be reasonably asked to make a Yes/No decision lacking the details. Therefore, once they are known there should be a 2nd vote.
At the moment, I'm voting No. I don't have enough information to vote for such a radical change. But I understand the Yes argument. There is another argument up here that runs like this. One cannot be reasonably asked to make a Yes/No decision lacking the details. Therefore, once they are known there should be a 2nd vote.