Direct rule from Scotland?
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Qatar
Age: 68
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should the SNP "expel Trident from the Faslane base as quickly as they can" then what would remain of UK after a secession would be too small to afford some significant defence of any sort, would it be an Air Force, an Army, a Navy or a nuclear "triad" - which for the moment is a one-finger element, with US warheads and US control in any case.
So in other words UK would become smaller, and the significant foreign population with no real british interests or feelings would become more apparent in perspective (just watch the number of indians who discover themselves scottish, as a result of some resentment towards "colonial" England...)
How sad that a country which didn't surrender in WWII and led the fight of the Free World for two years alone (75 years ago, anyway - it was a different generation) has now become so much prone to self-disbanding and desintegration ?
Being from another european country which still has independant nuc' submarines and bombers, along with MPA and aircraft carriers, I cannot prevent myself from thinking that we - and others - should benefit from that semi-retirement of this island country from the international scene, as a result of its reduction in size...
It seems the US got the same conclusion.
So in other words UK would become smaller, and the significant foreign population with no real british interests or feelings would become more apparent in perspective (just watch the number of indians who discover themselves scottish, as a result of some resentment towards "colonial" England...)
How sad that a country which didn't surrender in WWII and led the fight of the Free World for two years alone (75 years ago, anyway - it was a different generation) has now become so much prone to self-disbanding and desintegration ?
Being from another european country which still has independant nuc' submarines and bombers, along with MPA and aircraft carriers, I cannot prevent myself from thinking that we - and others - should benefit from that semi-retirement of this island country from the international scene, as a result of its reduction in size...
It seems the US got the same conclusion.
**bonus stars for Hang shuff for somehow getting in a mention for Mrs Thatcher here. Did she hate Scotland? How would you know -her party were/are firmly committed to the union; it's even in the name.
Thatcher's impact in Scotland was electorally lethal for the Conservative Party.A leader that a wide cross-section of Scots despise,making Conservatism toxic & playing a huge part in the rise of Scottish Nationalism.
Her behaviour towards has Scotland totally skewed British politics and has made the SNP's apparent influence over UK defence possible.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Yorkshire
Age: 55
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Introduction of the poll tax,closure of mines, steel plants and other traditional industries across Scotland,may have been indicators.
She appears to have hated most people, not just the Scots.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Duncraig, Oz
Age: 57
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reinhardt - UK Nuclear weapon warheads are UK designed, built and use plutonium from UK reactors. The only control the US has is the provision of replacement missile bodies and servicing since they make them.
The US has no direct control mechanism over the use of Trident Ballistic Missiles operated by the UK. It of course has in-direct control as in "Please God, don't fire one".
The US has no direct control mechanism over the use of Trident Ballistic Missiles operated by the UK. It of course has in-direct control as in "Please God, don't fire one".
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hoofie
IIRC, it's been revealed that the USA has to supply regular software updates. Should they decide not to do so the missiles become useless after a maximum of 18 months.
On another note I'm pleased that this thread has not been merged with the Jet Blast Scottish Independence thread. For one thing the standard of comments are rather better here.
Today someone told me that certain strategic industries, including the former Ferranti organisation that makes the Captor radar, would have to move to England, (or Wales or NI presumably) in the event of Scotland leaving the UK. Scaremongering or substance? Given that that radar is in any case produced by Selex, a primarily Italian company.
The whole question of Scottish independence looks set to make the discussion about the UK remaining part of the EU look trivial. Should the UK loose Scotland can the rest of the union remain part of the EU? The UK-Scotland union no longer being the same country that joined the EU. Should someone start promoting the idea that an independent Scotland would mean an automatic British exit even the UKIP will get behind the idea.
The only control the US has is the provision of replacement missile bodies and servicing since they make them.
On another note I'm pleased that this thread has not been merged with the Jet Blast Scottish Independence thread. For one thing the standard of comments are rather better here.
Today someone told me that certain strategic industries, including the former Ferranti organisation that makes the Captor radar, would have to move to England, (or Wales or NI presumably) in the event of Scotland leaving the UK. Scaremongering or substance? Given that that radar is in any case produced by Selex, a primarily Italian company.
The whole question of Scottish independence looks set to make the discussion about the UK remaining part of the EU look trivial. Should the UK loose Scotland can the rest of the union remain part of the EU? The UK-Scotland union no longer being the same country that joined the EU. Should someone start promoting the idea that an independent Scotland would mean an automatic British exit even the UKIP will get behind the idea.
Today someone told me that certain strategic industries, including the former Ferranti organisation that makes the Captor radar, would have to move to England, (or Wales or NI presumably) in the event of Scotland leaving the UK. Scaremongering or substance? Given that that radar is in any case produced by Selex, a primarily Italian company.
Presumably that is on the assumption that Scotland would not be a member of NATO, which obviously does include Italy.
In other words, a Ferranti or similar defence company based in an independent Scotland would have to compete on cost with other bidders across the EU, and could find competitors in the remaining-UK being given preference over them for remaining-UK defence contracts.
I'll keep it simple, folks.
Trident renewal is a red herring. If it's Milliband in govt with confidence and supply from the SNP then there are enough Tories and Labour willing to vote to renew Trident to make the SNP votes unnecessary.
And, we don't actually "need" anything from the UK, we're quite happy to go it alone. We raise enough taxes and are productive enough to stand on out own two feet. Heck, there are even plenty of skilled and semi skilled poor sods floating around in the Med right now I'd be delighted to give a home to. Countries need PEOPLE to prosper. The states have done pretty well with their "poor, huddled masses" in the last few hundred years.
So once and for all, if you're all so fed up with perfidious Albion, LET US GO! Keep your Tories, UKIP and champagne socialists, let us get on with running our country for ourselves. Rant over.
ps, check out "Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 (c. 14)". A government can only be brought down now if they lose a vote of no confidence OR a two thirds majority of members votes that there shall be a new Parliament. Remember, once this election is done and dusted the SNP and other parties in Scotland have to do it ALL OVER AGAIN in 2016 for the Scottish Parliament.
Trident renewal is a red herring. If it's Milliband in govt with confidence and supply from the SNP then there are enough Tories and Labour willing to vote to renew Trident to make the SNP votes unnecessary.
And, we don't actually "need" anything from the UK, we're quite happy to go it alone. We raise enough taxes and are productive enough to stand on out own two feet. Heck, there are even plenty of skilled and semi skilled poor sods floating around in the Med right now I'd be delighted to give a home to. Countries need PEOPLE to prosper. The states have done pretty well with their "poor, huddled masses" in the last few hundred years.
So once and for all, if you're all so fed up with perfidious Albion, LET US GO! Keep your Tories, UKIP and champagne socialists, let us get on with running our country for ourselves. Rant over.
ps, check out "Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 (c. 14)". A government can only be brought down now if they lose a vote of no confidence OR a two thirds majority of members votes that there shall be a new Parliament. Remember, once this election is done and dusted the SNP and other parties in Scotland have to do it ALL OVER AGAIN in 2016 for the Scottish Parliament.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
So once and for all, if you're all so fed up with perfidious Albion, LET US GO!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Herod
Living in England you won;t be privy to the number of people who voted no last September on the basis of what was promised and who now wished they'd voted yes. Believe me, it's a lot.
Al R
Read Standard & Poor's analysis of what the economy of an Independent Scotland would comprise. Only about 15% of the economy would be based on oil revenue. Scotland is an extremely diverse economy, as is the entire UK. At oil prices around $60 a barrel very few fields in the North Sea are actually paying tax, so how much revenue is the UK Exchequer losing itself? Of course, as has been discussed ad infinitum, if successive UK govts had set up an oil fund like Norway.... As before, I'd be happy to take my chances. Oh, and S & P also said one of the strengths of Scotland at present is open and accountable government and public bodies. We've had a Parliament here since 1999 without any expense scandals, cash for questions, nepotism or ministers of state exerting undue influence.
As I said previously, we don't need anything from the UK Parliament, (other than another Independence Referendum when the Scottish People are ready for it), so the idea that SNP MPs would operate as some sort of wrecking bar in the parliament is only coming from the opposition. Trident would go through without SNP votes and there is very little else where SNP votes would be required. You can't beg and plead for us to stay as part of the UK then throw your toys out of the pram when we have the temerity to vote the way we want to and then possibly use that to our advantage as and when required. In the lead up to the Referendum last September David Cameron said that Scotland should not only stay in the UK, but should lead the UK. Bet he wishes he'd kept his trap shut now.
And finally, none of this really matters up here now. The SNP vote is in the bag, and is at a level that the other parties can only dream about. Instead of spending air time and effort trying to influence something they can't change, perhaps the Tories and Labour should concentrate their efforts where they'd have the most impact, on each other.
Living in England you won;t be privy to the number of people who voted no last September on the basis of what was promised and who now wished they'd voted yes. Believe me, it's a lot.
Al R
Read Standard & Poor's analysis of what the economy of an Independent Scotland would comprise. Only about 15% of the economy would be based on oil revenue. Scotland is an extremely diverse economy, as is the entire UK. At oil prices around $60 a barrel very few fields in the North Sea are actually paying tax, so how much revenue is the UK Exchequer losing itself? Of course, as has been discussed ad infinitum, if successive UK govts had set up an oil fund like Norway.... As before, I'd be happy to take my chances. Oh, and S & P also said one of the strengths of Scotland at present is open and accountable government and public bodies. We've had a Parliament here since 1999 without any expense scandals, cash for questions, nepotism or ministers of state exerting undue influence.
As I said previously, we don't need anything from the UK Parliament, (other than another Independence Referendum when the Scottish People are ready for it), so the idea that SNP MPs would operate as some sort of wrecking bar in the parliament is only coming from the opposition. Trident would go through without SNP votes and there is very little else where SNP votes would be required. You can't beg and plead for us to stay as part of the UK then throw your toys out of the pram when we have the temerity to vote the way we want to and then possibly use that to our advantage as and when required. In the lead up to the Referendum last September David Cameron said that Scotland should not only stay in the UK, but should lead the UK. Bet he wishes he'd kept his trap shut now.
And finally, none of this really matters up here now. The SNP vote is in the bag, and is at a level that the other parties can only dream about. Instead of spending air time and effort trying to influence something they can't change, perhaps the Tories and Labour should concentrate their efforts where they'd have the most impact, on each other.
Last edited by alwayslookingup; 23rd Apr 2015 at 21:46.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tengah Type
Yep. Give us full fiscal autonomy. Let us raise all our own taxes and give us control of all the revenue raised (including, of course, the revenue raised from North Sea Oil and Gas fields that would devolve to Scotland). What's hard about that? No need for rUK to have to worry about subsidising us any more, no worries about the amount of money "going over Hadrian's Wall". Just leave us to it, we're not your worry any more. How hard is that to accept?
Yep. Give us full fiscal autonomy. Let us raise all our own taxes and give us control of all the revenue raised (including, of course, the revenue raised from North Sea Oil and Gas fields that would devolve to Scotland). What's hard about that? No need for rUK to have to worry about subsidising us any more, no worries about the amount of money "going over Hadrian's Wall". Just leave us to it, we're not your worry any more. How hard is that to accept?
Trident renewal is a red herring. If it's Milliband in govt with confidence and supply from the SNP then there are enough Tories and Labour willing to vote to renew Trident to make the SNP votes unnecessary.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Living in England you won;t be privy to the number of people who voted no last September on the basis of what was promised and who now wished they'd voted yes. Believe me, it's a lot.
Thus, I watched the referendum with a forensic and analytic eye, from the perspective of being right in the thick of it.
That quote above is not true - pure and simple. A lot of Scotland will always vote no (just as a lot of Scotland will always vote yes). Look at the votes away for the central belt, which at times reached 65% No.
The vote is predominantly ordered around age demographics. Every morning I sat in the gym sauna and listened to 40 plus Scots ranting about wee eck. Every day I went to work and listened to 20 plus Scots ranting about Captain Darling.
Scotland will get independence have no fear of that, and maybe by a smash and grab opportunistic raid in a few years. But much, much more likely in 10-15 years time, when the top half of the current population have shuffled off the mortal coil.
Pity really, life should be an adventure and I was looking forward to the opportunities carving up the UK would present.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re "Let us go!" There is a thread running (on jetblast) on the subject of independence. The issue isn't whether or not the SNP would make a good job of running Scotland; it's whether they should be put in a position "to call the tune" for the entire UK.
Pious pilot, I'd like to be shafted by the jock or spiv that wins the election, not whoever gets most leverage in the likely event of a minority government
Pious pilot, I'd like to be shafted by the jock or spiv that wins the election, not whoever gets most leverage in the likely event of a minority government
Last edited by ShotOne; 24th Apr 2015 at 14:45.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Ref my post 49. The population of the UK is about 63.8 million; of which 5.3 million (8%). IF the SNP win their 40 seats and end up supporting a minority government, we get the situation where a group of MPs, who we didn't have any chance of voting for, and whose whole raison d'etre is the break up of the nation, holding the rest of us to ransom. I guess it's democracy of a sort, but I'm not sure it's what it should be..
