Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Scötterdämmerung. The Twilight of the Union?

245

Comments

  • Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    The major issue is surely not the number of crossings but the volume of traffic. 30,000 people cross the Northern Irish border every day; the Scottish border has 100,000 commuters alone, to say nothing of other traffic.
    Quiote so. But if the Scots rejion the EU, as they may well do, then the problem reverts to a rUK-EU issue, which will have been solved by then - won't it??
    If the Scottish government can negotiate to leave the UK while simultaneously negotiating to join the EU, without having any trained negotiators on staff already, and manage to coordinate leaving the UK with joining the EU to the very second, then the 60% of Scottish trade that goes to the UK will 'only' have to go through whatever checks rUK goods have to go through to get to the EU. The checks, incidentally, which the SNP say are so intolerable that they want to leave the UK. However, if they mess any stage of the procedure up, that 60% of trade has to be given the full array of customs checks that would be applied to goods coming from, say, Botswana.

    More important than any of that is the acknowledgement that patterns of living between Scotland and England are far more intertwined than patterns of living between Northern Ireland and Ireland or the UK and the EU, and that the Scottish separatist movement will perform what amounts to an amputation of them.

    EDIT: In fact, it turns out the UK has agreed post-Brexit trade continuity with Botswana, so goods coming from Scotland won't even be on parity with them.
    What you have enunciated is an excellent argument for accelerated joining of the EU, or at least the free trade area - as those negotiations of the EU with the UK should have been completed by then (as the Brexiters have been telling us for years).
    I think it's a fairly terrible argument for joining the EU (£13bn of trade) by leaving the UK internal market (£45bn of trade). It also all hinges on the assumption that the Scottish government can simultaneously negotiate to leave the UK, negotiate to join the EU, and set up the infrastructure to run a country (everything from printing passports to creating a central bank, foreign ministry, ministry of defence). It assumes that the EU will negotiate with representatives of an unrecognised nation, when they might choose to wait for the departure from the UK to be completed first; it also assumes that the UK will be happy to wait the decade or more it could take Scotland to complete accession proceedings to finally declare Scotland independent. The only merit to the plan is that it may, at last, persuade SNP voters that the party is not omnipotent, but I can't see that the suffering it will cause to ordinary people in Scotland would make such an end worthwhile.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,023

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    We should have thought about that well before now.
    It was discussed in the indyref 1 white paper - and the 2010s, as I recall, was a time when the Navy and RAF were being run doiwn anyway (Nimrod, dockyards, and so on).

    More generally, there seems to be more interest by the Westminster Gmt in fighting expeditionary battles in the Middle & Far East - though at last something is being done about maritime patrol aircraft.
    So, as a Scottish nationalist, what do you suggest the answer is?
    Very unhappy with the lack of current emphasis of monitoring and defence of home waters/homeland/EEZ, actually - the Nimrod foulup was just the cherry on the cake so to speak, but other symptoms were the degradation of other aspects of maritime rescue cover such as the helicopters and the emergency tugs in the Minches. I have to go and tidy the house, so I won't say more than I'd like to see much more attention to those issues.
    So what is this

    https://twitter.com/BoeingUK/status/1296363887470817280?s=09
    Good. But -

    About 15 years too late, given the ENORMOUS gap in capabilities for ten full years, since Nimrod was taken out of service in 2010.

    That a competent defence of the GIUK gap and the welfare of its seafarers - my sharny ****.

  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,322
    TSE wrote: "Very bluntly put, if Scotland secedes then the remainder of the United Kingdom becomes even more Tory."

    Tory? Bluekip.

    This is not a conservative govt.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    Better good neighbours than truculent tenants.

    So long and thanks for all the fish.

    Agreed but for some Scots with their never ending feelings of victimhood more likely to be truculent neighbours. Who can forget the scenes on motorway bridges of angry nats demanding the English go home or don;t come to Scotland. Because we're all "diseased".
    Little Englander Jessie boy appears, bitter twisted sad little twerp. adjust your twinset and pearls and stop sooking that lemon.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,281

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    I count 30, but I know Google maps sometimes marks old rights of way as roads which are now not passable to cars - footpaths only. There were a couple of places where the border runs up the middle of a road/path - but it's possible the map is inaccurate.

    Certainly nothing compared to the Northern Ireland border, and probably the Welsh.
    I think Alistair said there are 30 assuming you count old farm track and byways.

    I spotted a couple that ran up the middle of roads – but the OS Explorer map suggests that in fact the road belongs to one country or the other in most cases – the border is on the kerb.

    Still, the prize for the weirdest bit of the border must go to the Ba Green. A small meadow SOUTH of the Tweed at Coldstream which is forever Scottish because of the English conceding an annual football match.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,036
    It's a remarkable example of ostrich behaviour that so many Unionists believe(d) that the union could survive Brexit. Well, perhaps it could've survived a soft Brexit, one that was negotiated from Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast as well as from London, but allowing the Tory Party (and in effect the UK government) to be taken over by the Eurosceptics was a grave, probably fatal, mistake.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    malcolmg said:

    Better good neighbours than truculent tenants.

    So long and thanks for all the fish.

    Agreed but for some Scots with their never ending feelings of victimhood more likely to be truculent neighbours. Who can forget the scenes on motorway bridges of angry nats demanding the English go home or don;t come to Scotland. Because we're all "diseased".
    Little Englander Jessie boy appears, bitter twisted sad little twerp. adjust your twinset and pearls and stop sooking that lemon.
    Don't ever change Malc.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 17,682

    That pun again.....

    I had like 15 minutes to write this thread in between conference calls today.

    Plus, I'm glad I've managed to get 'great cleavage' in a thread header.
    With the state of the unionist parties in Holyrood it is more plumber's bum than Samantha Fox.

    (Showing my age there. Who is renowned for their assets these days?)
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    I don't see why scotland being an ally threatens european security anymore than belarus being an ally. They are about equidistant from most european countries. More of a threat to UK security certainly.

    I would expect the US to do nothing in the unlikely event just as they did about crimea and the EU to do even less. Granted they would spout a lot of hot air and wring their hands.....actions not so much
    The rUK wouldn't tolerate having Russian forces on the island of Great Britain only a few hundred miles march from London. It would threaten our entire defence strategy and home security. Not only ours, but also that of the US too which relies upon the UK alliance against Russia, and also has military bases and security apparatus here too. The EU wouldn't want the North Sea and Channel at risk of becoming a Russian lake either.

    A blockade and economic sanctions would probably do it but I can't think of a scenario more likely to lead to direct conflict between rUK and Scotland.

    It's a stupid idea.
    I didnt say it was likely.

    What I think however a lot more likely is the independent scots when asked what they are going to do to stop russian incursions into their waters and airspace might just shrug their shoulders and say "We don't care its not a problem to us"
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,007
    Pulpstar said:

    Proper sentence for Abedi. 55 years behind bars, quite right too.

    Minimum. Before he is considered for parole.

    Assuming he can survive 55 years without a shiv in the neck. 24/7 security on him is going to be a challenge.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    Growing up in Scotland with English parents, and now a Scot living in England, I was always a natural unionist. But Brexit has changed my mind. First, because of the ugly English nationalism that seems to have emerged in provincial England, which as a Scot and London resident is just utterly alien to me. And second, taking Scotland out of the EU against its will, with no effort at all to carve out a special status or to offer another independence referendum to give Scots a fair choice of EU vs UK, has convinced me that the Union is a toxic relationship for Scotland. Who knows, maybe Galloway and Gove (a parcel of rogues if ever I saw one) might even give me a chance to vote Yes this time.

    Ugly English Nationalism as opposed to the cuddly, friendly nationalism of Nicola and Co? and the nats on here?
    Yes the Scots Nats on here are generally polite, fine people.

    Malcolm is the exception but it is part of his personal brand to be rude – and he applies his rudeness equally and fairly to all.
    Yes, calling people indiscriminately ‘morons’ for daring to have a different view. I guess it is equal. But he is an ill mannered oaf in his behaviour.
    Johnny come lately faker. You are a humourless chinless wonder. The jessie boy of jessie boys.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    I don't see why scotland being an ally threatens european security anymore than belarus being an ally. They are about equidistant from most european countries. More of a threat to UK security certainly.

    I would expect the US to do nothing in the unlikely event just as they did about crimea and the EU to do even less. Granted they would spout a lot of hot air and wring their hands.....actions not so much
    The rUK wouldn't tolerate having Russian forces on the island of Great Britain only a few hundred miles march from London. It would threaten our entire defence strategy and home security. Not only ours, but also that of the US too which relies upon the UK alliance against Russia, and also has military bases and security apparatus here too. The EU wouldn't want the North Sea and Channel at risk of becoming a Russian lake either.

    A blockade and economic sanctions would probably do it but I can't think of a scenario more likely to lead to direct conflict between rUK and Scotland.

    It's a stupid idea.
    Wait till they lease the Outer Isles to China as a naval/military base: gotta keep those renmimbi coming in somehow, and oil isn't likely to cut it.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Proper sentence for Abedi. 55 years behind bars, quite right too.

    Minimum. Before he is considered for parole.

    Assuming he can survive 55 years without a shiv in the neck. 24/7 security on him is going to be a challenge.
    Had to feel sympathy, he made his bed.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    Your boyfriend does dumped you Steve. Good luck...

    https://twitter.com/TocRadio/status/1296468135328047104
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    Growing up in Scotland with English parents, and now a Scot living in England, I was always a natural unionist. But Brexit has changed my mind. First, because of the ugly English nationalism that seems to have emerged in provincial England, which as a Scot and London resident is just utterly alien to me. And second, taking Scotland out of the EU against its will, with no effort at all to carve out a special status or to offer another independence referendum to give Scots a fair choice of EU vs UK, has convinced me that the Union is a toxic relationship for Scotland. Who knows, maybe Galloway and Gove (a parcel of rogues if ever I saw one) might even give me a chance to vote Yes this time.

    Ugly English Nationalism as opposed to the cuddly, friendly nationalism of Nicola and Co? and the nats on here?
    Yes the Scots Nats on here are generally polite, fine people.

    Malcolm is the exception but it is part of his personal brand to be rude – and he applies his rudeness equally and fairly to all.
    He has no common sense or a sense of humour a complete bore, one pint with him and you would be jumping off a bridge.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    TSE wrote: "Very bluntly put, if Scotland secedes then the remainder of the United Kingdom becomes even more Tory."

    Tory? Bluekip.

    This is not a conservative govt.

    Quite.

    Sunak's spending plans would have sent the blessed Saint Margaret (PBUH) into orbit.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,137
    This is one of those classic Brexit issues where you might think that “common sense would prevail”, but it is actually an example of where the politics of Brexit overrides the practicalities of managing freight between the EU and the UK.
    https://www.ft.com/content/317a6b0b-2107-4156-899b-14d01c37ac88?shareType=nongift
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,326
    Pulpstar said:

    Independence and Anti-independence are the absolute centre-piece of every SNP and Tory campaign in the recent past and foreseeable future in Scotland, and they seem able to squeeze Labour out - which suits them both.
    Absolutely.
    The SCons might have to come up with some credible policies otherwise, despite everybody (including them) knowing they'll never be in a position to enact them.

    #RuthforFM
    #JacksonforFM
    #DRossforFM
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,007
    edited August 2020

    That pun again.....

    I had like 15 minutes to write this thread in between conference calls today.

    Plus, I'm glad I've managed to get 'great cleavage' in a thread header.
    With the state of the unionist parties in Holyrood it is more plumber's bum than Samantha Fox.

    (Showing my age there. Who is renowned for their assets these days?)
    I don't think it is acceptable now to even acknowledge lady bumps exist.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,459

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    I count 30, but I know Google maps sometimes marks old rights of way as roads which are now not passable to cars - footpaths only. There were a couple of places where the border runs up the middle of a road/path - but it's possible the map is inaccurate.

    Certainly nothing compared to the Northern Ireland border, and probably the Welsh.
    The traffic volume is much more
    So can be summarised as "More practical and plausible to actually have a border; more disruptive and intrusive to actually do it."
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,595
    IshmaelZ said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    I don't see why scotland being an ally threatens european security anymore than belarus being an ally. They are about equidistant from most european countries. More of a threat to UK security certainly.

    I would expect the US to do nothing in the unlikely event just as they did about crimea and the EU to do even less. Granted they would spout a lot of hot air and wring their hands.....actions not so much
    The rUK wouldn't tolerate having Russian forces on the island of Great Britain only a few hundred miles march from London. It would threaten our entire defence strategy and home security. Not only ours, but also that of the US too which relies upon the UK alliance against Russia, and also has military bases and security apparatus here too. The EU wouldn't want the North Sea and Channel at risk of becoming a Russian lake either.

    A blockade and economic sanctions would probably do it but I can't think of a scenario more likely to lead to direct conflict between rUK and Scotland.

    It's a stupid idea.
    Wait till they lease the Outer Isles to China as a naval/military base: gotta keep those renmimbi coming in somehow, and oil isn't likely to cut it.
    Why would Scotland invite foreign troops to have bases?

    I suspect that it would be largely neutral, with fisheries protection vessels and patrol aircraft, with the Scottish regiment contributing to the EU army. Smaller countries need allies, and the EU would be the obvious one.

    This obsession with a Russian invasion is historic sabre rattling. Those days are gone.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424
    Carnyx said:

    Galloway has a point about the failure to hold Sturgeon and co to account.
    But Galloway is a narcissistic tit without a clue about contemporary Scotland, its media or politics.

    Ah, I see.
    Given that endorsement you'd think he'd be a perfect fit into the upper echelons of the SNP

    When is the incompetent John Swinney going to fall on his sword over the education shambles ?
    Well, are you going to tell us which newspapers are pro-SNP?

    Carnyx, you would be as well talking to a plank , it would be more sensible.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,171
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    I don't see why scotland being an ally threatens european security anymore than belarus being an ally. They are about equidistant from most european countries. More of a threat to UK security certainly.

    I would expect the US to do nothing in the unlikely event just as they did about crimea and the EU to do even less. Granted they would spout a lot of hot air and wring their hands.....actions not so much
    The rUK wouldn't tolerate having Russian forces on the island of Great Britain only a few hundred miles march from London. It would threaten our entire defence strategy and home security. Not only ours, but also that of the US too which relies upon the UK alliance against Russia, and also has military bases and security apparatus here too. The EU wouldn't want the North Sea and Channel at risk of becoming a Russian lake either.

    A blockade and economic sanctions would probably do it but I can't think of a scenario more likely to lead to direct conflict between rUK and Scotland.

    It's a stupid idea.
    I didnt say it was likely.

    What I think however a lot more likely is the independent scots when asked what they are going to do to stop russian incursions into their waters and airspace might just shrug their shoulders and say "We don't care its not a problem to us"
    And, if they took that view, they might find themselves rapidly ostracised within NATO and the EU for which they are relying upon for their collective economic and political security.

    Then it will become clear just how isolated very small countries can be.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,023
    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    Galloway has a point about the failure to hold Sturgeon and co to account.
    But Galloway is a narcissistic tit without a clue about contemporary Scotland, its media or politics.

    Ah, I see.
    Given that endorsement you'd think he'd be a perfect fit into the upper echelons of the SNP

    When is the incompetent John Swinney going to fall on his sword over the education shambles ?
    Well, are you going to tell us which newspapers are pro-SNP?

    Carnyx, you would be as well talking to a plank , it would be more sensible.
    It's a shame as I'd have been really pleased to know his perceptions of the Scottish [sic] media - there are some interesting surprises to be had from such conversations.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,171
    IshmaelZ said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    We seem to get on fine with policing the GI bit of the gap despite not being joined at the hip with G or I. You answer your own question: something which none of rUK, NATO, the EU or the US could tolerate, is probably not going to happen.
    We do so because the military bases to do that (with the RAF and Royal Navy playing the key roles) are in the UK with several major ones in Scotland.

    It becomes far far harder to patrol and secure that gap from several hundred miles further south.

    I agree it's unlikely to happen. I was contesting the idea it was a credible option.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,660



    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.

    HYUFD level fantasy wanking here.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,171

    Growing up in Scotland with English parents, and now a Scot living in England, I was always a natural unionist. But Brexit has changed my mind. First, because of the ugly English nationalism that seems to have emerged in provincial England, which as a Scot and London resident is just utterly alien to me. And second, taking Scotland out of the EU against its will, with no effort at all to carve out a special status or to offer another independence referendum to give Scots a fair choice of EU vs UK, has convinced me that the Union is a toxic relationship for Scotland. Who knows, maybe Galloway and Gove (a parcel of rogues if ever I saw one) might even give me a chance to vote Yes this time.

    Ugly English Nationalism as opposed to the cuddly, friendly nationalism of Nicola and Co? and the nats on here?
    Yes the Scots Nats on here are generally polite, fine people.

    Malcolm is the exception but it is part of his personal brand to be rude – and he applies his rudeness equally and fairly to all.
    He's actually my favourite, and I find his insults rather funny.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    You don't half talk mince, total fantasy. The Russians fund the government, London is the laundry for their cash and they are allowed to waltz in , poison whoever they like and waltz back out again. Putin has no need to be in Scotland.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,171
    Alistair said:



    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.

    HYUFD level fantasy wanking here.
    It's the one scenario where I think HYUFD's fantasy would come true.

    And I'd support it.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    I don't see why scotland being an ally threatens european security anymore than belarus being an ally. They are about equidistant from most european countries. More of a threat to UK security certainly.

    I would expect the US to do nothing in the unlikely event just as they did about crimea and the EU to do even less. Granted they would spout a lot of hot air and wring their hands.....actions not so much
    The rUK wouldn't tolerate having Russian forces on the island of Great Britain only a few hundred miles march from London. It would threaten our entire defence strategy and home security. Not only ours, but also that of the US too which relies upon the UK alliance against Russia, and also has military bases and security apparatus here too. The EU wouldn't want the North Sea and Channel at risk of becoming a Russian lake either.

    A blockade and economic sanctions would probably do it but I can't think of a scenario more likely to lead to direct conflict between rUK and Scotland.

    It's a stupid idea.
    I didnt say it was likely.

    What I think however a lot more likely is the independent scots when asked what they are going to do to stop russian incursions into their waters and airspace might just shrug their shoulders and say "We don't care its not a problem to us"
    And, if they took that view, they might find themselves rapidly ostracised within NATO and the EU for which they are relying upon for their collective economic and political security.

    Then it will become clear just how isolated very small countries can be.
    Gosh such faith in two impotent organisations....the eu will do nothing except mouth platitudes because too much of it is dependent on russian gas.

    Nato will sabre rattle which is about all because quite frankly america doesn't really care much about russia any more its seen as a european issue. They are more focussed on china
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,394

    Growing up in Scotland with English parents, and now a Scot living in England, I was always a natural unionist. But Brexit has changed my mind. First, because of the ugly English nationalism that seems to have emerged in provincial England, which as a Scot and London resident is just utterly alien to me. And second, taking Scotland out of the EU against its will, with no effort at all to carve out a special status or to offer another independence referendum to give Scots a fair choice of EU vs UK, has convinced me that the Union is a toxic relationship for Scotland. Who knows, maybe Galloway and Gove (a parcel of rogues if ever I saw one) might even give me a chance to vote Yes this time.

    Ugly English Nationalism as opposed to the cuddly, friendly nationalism of Nicola and Co? and the nats on here?
    To be honest I have always disliked the SNP but they are not ugly nationalists in the Brexiteer mould. People who claim otherwise simply reveal their ignorance of Scottish politics.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,171
    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    One option you wont find from any pollster is

    'the government should have have pressed on with holding examinations'

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,326
    edited August 2020
    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    Galloway has a point about the failure to hold Sturgeon and co to account.
    But Galloway is a narcissistic tit without a clue about contemporary Scotland, its media or politics.

    Ah, I see.
    Given that endorsement you'd think he'd be a perfect fit into the upper echelons of the SNP

    When is the incompetent John Swinney going to fall on his sword over the education shambles ?
    Well, are you going to tell us which newspapers are pro-SNP?

    Carnyx, you would be as well talking to a plank , it would be more sensible.
    It's a shame as I'd have been really pleased to know his perceptions of the Scottish [sic] media - there are some interesting surprises to be had from such conversations.
    I for one am dying to know which of these organs have changed tack since 2014.

    Against independence

    Daily Record (UK-wide)[12]
    City AM (UK-wide)[13]
    Daily Mirror (UK-wide)[14]
    The Herald (Scotland)[15]
    Scottish Daily Mail (Scotland)[16]
    Scotland on Sunday (Scotland)[17]
    Sunday Post (Scotland)[18]
    Sunday Telegraph (UK-wide)[19]
    The Daily Telegraph (UK-wide)[19]
    The Financial Times (UK-wide)[20]
    The Independent (UK-wide)[21]
    The Globe and Mail (Canada)[22]
    The Guardian (UK-wide)[23]
    The Morning Star (UK-wide)[24]
    The Scottish Daily Express (Scotland)[25]
    The Scottish Sunday Express (Scotland)[26]
    The Scotsman (Scotland)[27]
    The Shetland Times (Scotland)[28]
    The Sunday Times (UK-wide)[29]
    The Times (UK-wide)[30]
    Western Mail (Wales)[31]

    For independence

    Sunday Herald

    https://tinyurl.com/yyvf6v2q


  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 7,280
    edited August 2020
    I see Steve Bannon is in a spot of bother. It was only a few weeks ago he was describing Dominic Cummings as a "brilliant guy", and Boris Johnson as an "important" person who should go for a "hard out, no deal", so Johnson and Cummings will presumably hope there aren't too many more unadvertised links with him to be unearthed during the autumn the negotiations.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Foxy said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    I don't see why scotland being an ally threatens european security anymore than belarus being an ally. They are about equidistant from most european countries. More of a threat to UK security certainly.

    I would expect the US to do nothing in the unlikely event just as they did about crimea and the EU to do even less. Granted they would spout a lot of hot air and wring their hands.....actions not so much
    The rUK wouldn't tolerate having Russian forces on the island of Great Britain only a few hundred miles march from London. It would threaten our entire defence strategy and home security. Not only ours, but also that of the US too which relies upon the UK alliance against Russia, and also has military bases and security apparatus here too. The EU wouldn't want the North Sea and Channel at risk of becoming a Russian lake either.

    A blockade and economic sanctions would probably do it but I can't think of a scenario more likely to lead to direct conflict between rUK and Scotland.

    It's a stupid idea.
    Wait till they lease the Outer Isles to China as a naval/military base: gotta keep those renmimbi coming in somehow, and oil isn't likely to cut it.
    Why would Scotland invite foreign troops to have bases?

    I suspect that it would be largely neutral, with fisheries protection vessels and patrol aircraft, with the Scottish regiment contributing to the EU army. Smaller countries need allies, and the EU would be the obvious one.

    This obsession with a Russian invasion is historic sabre rattling. Those days are gone.
    It wouldn't, this is Self Righteous Brothers style paranoia: If she was to enter into an offensive/defensive alliance with a major non-NATO power I would have to say to her Hey! You! Sturgeon...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,660
    edited August 2020

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    I count 30, but I know Google maps sometimes marks old rights of way as roads which are now not passable to cars - footpaths only. There were a couple of places where the border runs up the middle of a road/path - but it's possible the map is inaccurate.

    Certainly nothing compared to the Northern Ireland border, and probably the Welsh.
    I think Alistair said there are 30 assuming you count old farm track and byways.

    I spotted a couple that ran up the middle of roads – but the OS Explorer map suggests that in fact the road belongs to one country or the other in most cases – the border is on the kerb.

    Still, the prize for the weirdest bit of the border must go to the Ba Green. A small meadow SOUTH of the Tweed at Coldstream which is forever Scottish because of the English conceding an annual football match.
    I think I said 28 but I had chosen not to count a couple of roads that cross the border then immediatly end in moorland with no way to join the larger road network without a couple of sure footed Border Horse to take you and your perfectly legal cargo onwards.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,322
    Alistair said:



    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.

    HYUFD level fantasy wanking here.
    A crude metaphor, but ....

    Scotland does not want Russia, it wants Brussels.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,322
    Scott_xP said:

    twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1296479265677094912

    Perhaps the list of who is NOT quarantined might be shorter? Or should we just lock the entire world out for the remainder of 2020? :D:D
  • Scott_xP said:
    Austria was added to Norway's yesterday plus UK
  • Scott_xP said:

    twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1296479265677094912

    Perhaps the list of who is NOT quarantined might be shorter? Or should we just lock the entire world out for the remainder of 2020? :D:D
    Yes we should.

    Until there is a vaccine we should quarantine anyone who comes into the country - and open up the country as much as we can.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Its interesting how the stoutest remainer defenders of free movement in Europe are among the loudest to applaud when Grant Schapps effectively shuts down access to ever more parts of Europe.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    I count 30, but I know Google maps sometimes marks old rights of way as roads which are now not passable to cars - footpaths only. There were a couple of places where the border runs up the middle of a road/path - but it's possible the map is inaccurate.

    Certainly nothing compared to the Northern Ireland border, and probably the Welsh.
    Be lucky 3 main roads and about 6 B roads at best , rest are footpaths or farm tracks. Only 3 would have commerce or lorries.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
    The UK would not under any circumstance invade an independent Scotland. It would face a revolt if it did amongst its own people. For everyone like you will to send young men to go kill scots there are a lot more who would be standing in your way.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,293
    Right now we have Sturgeon giving party political broadcasts for 30 minutes a day on prime time TV, we have her adopting the role of "nanny of the nation" keeping us safe from a largely non existent threat (2 people in ICUs in all of Scotland, no deaths for over a month now), we have a situation where the UK government has kept a lot of people employed through the furlough scheme and the Rishi Dishies initiative but remains pretty much invisible on the stage and we have a Labour party led by a Corbynite that has little in common with the new leader.

    All of this has boosted the SNP, despite their economic vandalism, their educational incompetence and the sad, sad state of Scottish public services. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But this state of affairs will not remain indefinitely. Unionists just need to grit their teeth and get on with it drawing attention to the multiple failings of the Scottish government until the message gets home. Not easy, I don't underestimate Sturgeon for a moment, but not impossible either.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424
    Carnyx said:

    Better good neighbours than truculent tenants.

    So long and thanks for all the fish.

    Agreed but for some Scots with their never ending feelings of victimhood more likely to be truculent neighbours. Who can forget the scenes on motorway bridges of angry nats demanding the English go home or don;t come to Scotland. Because we're all "diseased".
    I can count 4 errors in that statement about Lamberton Toll (no motorway, no bridge, the only scene, and the/a leading perpretrator is not a SNP activist - quite the opposite).

    You shouldn't believe media and publicist constructs. This is getting to remind me of Jim MUrphy's egg (thtown by a Labour voting shift worker fed up of Mr M using a loudhailer under his bedroom window) and Ian Murray's constituency office being allgedly trashed by Alex Salmond personally in 2013/14 (okay, last bit re 'personally' an exaggeration on my part, buyt not much) - I saw the horrendous damage with my own eyes: one single Yes sticker about 3cm diameter, and some locak youth gang territorial slogans with marker pens, of noi political meaning whatsoever.
    He is a bigoted clown Carnyx, best ignored. He is just Foremain in a new ID.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,007
    "Teachers" getting off lightly in the polling....
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    The major issue is surely not the number of crossings but the volume of traffic. 30,000 people cross the Northern Irish border every day; the Scottish border has 100,000 commuters alone, to say nothing of other traffic.
    All just bollox, it is only an issue if sad losers cannot stand losing their last colony and decide to be arseholes and cut off their nose to spite their face.
    It will be a NON issue.
  • malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    Better good neighbours than truculent tenants.

    So long and thanks for all the fish.

    Agreed but for some Scots with their never ending feelings of victimhood more likely to be truculent neighbours. Who can forget the scenes on motorway bridges of angry nats demanding the English go home or don;t come to Scotland. Because we're all "diseased".
    I can count 4 errors in that statement about Lamberton Toll (no motorway, no bridge, the only scene, and the/a leading perpretrator is not a SNP activist - quite the opposite).

    You shouldn't believe media and publicist constructs. This is getting to remind me of Jim MUrphy's egg (thtown by a Labour voting shift worker fed up of Mr M using a loudhailer under his bedroom window) and Ian Murray's constituency office being allgedly trashed by Alex Salmond personally in 2013/14 (okay, last bit re 'personally' an exaggeration on my part, buyt not much) - I saw the horrendous damage with my own eyes: one single Yes sticker about 3cm diameter, and some locak youth gang territorial slogans with marker pens, of noi political meaning whatsoever.
    He is a bigoted clown Carnyx, best ignored. He is just Foremain in a new ID.
    I haven’t got a clue who foreman is. However if you think my opposing nationalist bigotry makes me a bigot that says everything I need to know about you.

    I won’t insult you in return. I don’t see the point. I’m above that.
  • The shambolic handling of the covid19 crisis by the SNP regime has seen another increase in cases. England seems to have got it generally right. Can the SNP learn lessons from the Tories on handling the pandemic.

    https://www.itv.com/news/2020-08-20/scotland-lockdown-easing-paused-after-highest-number-of-daily-coronavirus-cases-recorded-in-90-days
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,171
    Pagan2 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
    The UK would not under any circumstance invade an independent Scotland. It would face a revolt if it did amongst its own people. For everyone like you will to send young men to go kill scots there are a lot more who would be standing in your way.
    It wouldn't be there to kill Scots - it would be there to evict or pre-empt Russian troop deployments or basing. The same would have happened to the Irish sea ports in WWII had the need ever arised.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424
    I am amazed at times by the ignorance , bias and stupidity shown on here by supposedly intelligent people and nowadays they seem to be breeding and pushing out the sensible people.. It certainly shows why the UK is going down the pan. The sooner Scotland get out of it the better.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424
    DavidL said:

    Right now we have Sturgeon giving party political broadcasts for 30 minutes a day on prime time TV, we have her adopting the role of "nanny of the nation" keeping us safe from a largely non existent threat (2 people in ICUs in all of Scotland, no deaths for over a month now), we have a situation where the UK government has kept a lot of people employed through the furlough scheme and the Rishi Dishies initiative but remains pretty much invisible on the stage and we have a Labour party led by a Corbynite that has little in common with the new leader.

    All of this has boosted the SNP, despite their economic vandalism, their educational incompetence and the sad, sad state of Scottish public services. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But this state of affairs will not remain indefinitely. Unionists just need to grit their teeth and get on with it drawing attention to the multiple failings of the Scottish government until the message gets home. Not easy, I don't underestimate Sturgeon for a moment, but not impossible either.

    Were you singing Land of Hope and Glory as you penned that David.
  • malcolmg said:

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    The major issue is surely not the number of crossings but the volume of traffic. 30,000 people cross the Northern Irish border every day; the Scottish border has 100,000 commuters alone, to say nothing of other traffic.
    All just bollox, it is only an issue if sad losers cannot stand losing their last colony and decide to be arseholes and cut off their nose to spite their face.
    It will be a NON issue.
    Colony ?

    You do realise the act of union with Scotland was purely voluntary and the Scots joined willingly.

    It’s not like Ireland.

    I get it you want out. I want you out too. I’m happy for Scotland to go its own way if that’s what a majority in the whole union wants. But a colony. LOL.
  • malcolmg said:

    I am amazed at times by the ignorance , bias and stupidity shown on here by supposedly intelligent people and nowadays they seem to be breeding and pushing out the sensible people.. It certainly shows why the UK is going down the pan. The sooner Scotland get out of it the better.

    There is a saying

    'You protest too much'

    Very true in your case Malc
  • Scott_xP said:
    There’s a first. She’s not made the subject matter totally about her.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,595

    I see Steve Bannon is in a pickle. It was only a few weeks ago he was describing Dominic Cummings as a "brilliant guy", so DC will presumably be hoping there aren't too many unadvertised links to unearth.

    Ahem:

    https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1296461678528344067?s=09

  • Scott_xP said:

    twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1296479265677094912

    Perhaps the list of who is NOT quarantined might be shorter? Or should we just lock the entire world out for the remainder of 2020? :D:D
    What an utter clusterfuck.
  • I've been saying this haven't I?

    The politics of the North is changing. Largely I think due to housing, housing is cheap up here and people can easily get on the housing ladder.

    I would like to see a breakdown of red wall home ownership rates but I bet they are probably most improved since 2010 and the Tories have been rewarded as a result.

    It is not all about Corbyn.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,033
    edited August 2020

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    I have crossed most of the 25 or so border roads in my time, especially those spanning the Tweed and Teviot, but in truth Gretna is the principal crossing while Berwick in the east may become more relevant once it is dualed all the way between Edinburgh and Newcastle
    As long as there are enough crossings to enable Scots to smuggle in competitively priced goods from England...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    Pagan2 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
    The UK would not under any circumstance invade an independent Scotland. It would face a revolt if it did amongst its own people. For everyone like you will to send young men to go kill scots there are a lot more who would be standing in your way.
    It wouldn't be there to kill Scots - it would be there to evict or pre-empt Russian troop deployments or basing. The same would have happened to the Irish sea ports in WWII had the need ever arised.

    Why do they almost totally ignore it now then , last time Russians approached tehy had to get an old tug out of dry dock in Southampton and send it up, the Russians had a 3 day holiday and were still a thousand miles away by the time they had rowed to Scotland. What happened to the army base that was to have 8000 based in it , oooh that's right it was a lie as they put them in England.
    We could have a Dad's Army and do a better job.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,060
    edited August 2020
    DavidL said:

    Right now we have Sturgeon giving party political broadcasts for 30 minutes a day on prime time TV, we have her adopting the role of "nanny of the nation" keeping us safe from a largely non existent threat (2 people in ICUs in all of Scotland, no deaths for over a month now), we have a situation where the UK government has kept a lot of people employed through the furlough scheme and the Rishi Dishies initiative but remains pretty much invisible on the stage and we have a Labour party led by a Corbynite that has little in common with the new leader.

    All of this has boosted the SNP, despite their economic vandalism, their educational incompetence and the sad, sad state of Scottish public services. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But this state of affairs will not remain indefinitely. Unionists just need to grit their teeth and get on with it drawing attention to the multiple failings of the Scottish government until the message gets home. Not easy, I don't underestimate Sturgeon for a moment, but not impossible either.

    Economic activity here in Wales is remarkable and I expect it to be so in England

    Sturgeon's strangle hold on Scotland's economy, especially with winter on it's way, is going to see adverse comparisons with the rest of the UK with increasing job loses and business failures

    Let us see how that pans out with her ratings
  • What exactly was so appealing in 2017 that Labour got 50% of the vote in the red wall?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    Pagan2 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
    The UK would not under any circumstance invade an independent Scotland. It would face a revolt if it did amongst its own people. For everyone like you will to send young men to go kill scots there are a lot more who would be standing in your way.
    It wouldn't be there to kill Scots - it would be there to evict or pre-empt Russian troop deployments or basing. The same would have happened to the Irish sea ports in WWII had the need ever arised.

    And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?

    For a start 8% of uk troops are from scotland, they would be on the other side. A good part of the other 92% is likely to know some of them and be reluctant to fight. Then you would have all the scots living in england not being very happy with the move, probably joined by a lot of the welsh, irish and cornish.

    Most people don't care what the military think they don't really see Putin as a big threat to their way of life and really wouldn't give a toss about their being an army camp no more than they did when american bases were set up. They would care about an invasion of Scotland as they would see it as akin to a civil war and would know to many people on both sides.

    All evidence this century shows the EU and NATO will do nothing about russia. Ask Crimea and the Ukraine. No one really cares apart from you and probably HYUFD.

    I suspect most are like me and if asked to rank the threats to their way of life would probably list them as

    1) The uk government
    2) China
    3) USA
    .....
    10099th Vladimir Putin
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,137

    DavidL said:

    Right now we have Sturgeon giving party political broadcasts for 30 minutes a day on prime time TV, we have her adopting the role of "nanny of the nation" keeping us safe from a largely non existent threat (2 people in ICUs in all of Scotland, no deaths for over a month now), we have a situation where the UK government has kept a lot of people employed through the furlough scheme and the Rishi Dishies initiative but remains pretty much invisible on the stage and we have a Labour party led by a Corbynite that has little in common with the new leader.

    All of this has boosted the SNP, despite their economic vandalism, their educational incompetence and the sad, sad state of Scottish public services. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But this state of affairs will not remain indefinitely. Unionists just need to grit their teeth and get on with it drawing attention to the multiple failings of the Scottish government until the message gets home. Not easy, I don't underestimate Sturgeon for a moment, but not impossible either.

    Economic activity here in Wales is remarkable and I expect it to be so in England

    Sturgeon's strangle hold on Scotland's economy, especially with winter on it's way, is going to see adverse comparisons with the rest of the UK with increasing job loses and business failures

    Let us see how that pans out with her ratings
    She'll blame the Toe-reeeeeeeees
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419

    What exactly was so appealing in 2017 that Labour got 50% of the vote in the red wall?

    Theresa May
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Foxy said:

    I see Steve Bannon is in a pickle. It was only a few weeks ago he was describing Dominic Cummings as a "brilliant guy", so DC will presumably be hoping there aren't too many unadvertised links to unearth.

    Ahem:

    https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1296461678528344067?s=09

    Facing Jail?

    That was a quick trial
  • That graph is interesting, in a sense 2019 was a return to the average in the red wall, which just undermines how successful relatively the Tories have been. If you look prior to 2017, the red wall would likely not have fell because of the Tory vote being split. 2017 and 2019 you can see their vote becomes remarkably efficient and then Labour's declines back to the mean and poof.

    So as we know already, 2017 basically hid what was going on.

    Big problems for Labour.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,326
    edited August 2020

    DavidL said:

    Right now we have Sturgeon giving party political broadcasts for 30 minutes a day on prime time TV, we have her adopting the role of "nanny of the nation" keeping us safe from a largely non existent threat (2 people in ICUs in all of Scotland, no deaths for over a month now), we have a situation where the UK government has kept a lot of people employed through the furlough scheme and the Rishi Dishies initiative but remains pretty much invisible on the stage and we have a Labour party led by a Corbynite that has little in common with the new leader.

    All of this has boosted the SNP, despite their economic vandalism, their educational incompetence and the sad, sad state of Scottish public services. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But this state of affairs will not remain indefinitely. Unionists just need to grit their teeth and get on with it drawing attention to the multiple failings of the Scottish government until the message gets home. Not easy, I don't underestimate Sturgeon for a moment, but not impossible either.

    Economic activity here in Wales is remarkable and I expect it to be so in England

    Sturgeon's strangle hold on Scotland's economy, especially with winter on it's way, is going to see adverse comparisons with the rest of the UK with increasing job loses and business failures

    Let us see how that pans out with her ratings
    Hooray, reversion from 'Scotland's as shit as the rest of the UK' back to 'Scotland's more shit than the rest of the UK' (and with bonus Sturgeon's honeymoon with voters over). Nature is healing.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424
    MattW said:

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    I have crossed most of the 25 or so border roads in my time, especially those spanning the Tweed and Teviot, but in truth Gretna is the principal crossing while Berwick in the east may become more relevant once it is dualed all the way between Edinburgh and Newcastle
    As long as there are enough crossings to enable Scots to smuggle in competitively priced goods from England...
    Joke of the year for sure
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    edited August 2020

    What exactly was so appealing in 2017 that Labour got 50% of the vote in the red wall?

    It was the only time they entertained leaving the EU/doing something about immigration
  • DavidL said:

    Right now we have Sturgeon giving party political broadcasts for 30 minutes a day on prime time TV, we have her adopting the role of "nanny of the nation" keeping us safe from a largely non existent threat (2 people in ICUs in all of Scotland, no deaths for over a month now), we have a situation where the UK government has kept a lot of people employed through the furlough scheme and the Rishi Dishies initiative but remains pretty much invisible on the stage and we have a Labour party led by a Corbynite that has little in common with the new leader.

    All of this has boosted the SNP, despite their economic vandalism, their educational incompetence and the sad, sad state of Scottish public services. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But this state of affairs will not remain indefinitely. Unionists just need to grit their teeth and get on with it drawing attention to the multiple failings of the Scottish government until the message gets home. Not easy, I don't underestimate Sturgeon for a moment, but not impossible either.

    Economic activity here in Wales is remarkable and I expect it to be so in England

    Sturgeon's strangle hold on Scotland's economy, especially with winter on it's way, is going to see adverse comparisons with the rest of the UK with increasing job loses and business failures

    Let us see how that pans out with her ratings
    She'll blame the Toe-reeeeeeeees
    Nowhere to hide.

    Sturgeon has put the strangle hold on the Scots economy
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,588
    People like @Casino_Royale seem to think that the opinion of English “remoaners” on whether Scotland should be independent or not matters, for some reason.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    Foxy said:

    I see Steve Bannon is in a pickle. It was only a few weeks ago he was describing Dominic Cummings as a "brilliant guy", so DC will presumably be hoping there aren't too many unadvertised links to unearth.

    Ahem:

    https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1296461678528344067?s=09

    Facing Jail?

    That was a quick trial
    Two cheeks of the same arse
  • What exactly was so appealing in 2017 that Labour got 50% of the vote in the red wall?

    The two-party-combined share of the vote shot up across the entire country.

    Have a look at the two-party-combined share that Labour have got.

    England and Wales:
    2010: 42.6%
    2015: 44.4%
    2017: 48.3%
    2019: 42.0%

    Red Wall:
    2010: 54.9%
    2015: 56.8%
    2017: 54.3%
    2019: 45.3%

    Despite England and Wales swinging to Labour in 2017, the Red Wall actually swung to the Tories in 2017. That was masked though by the squeeze of the minor parties though.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,137

    DavidL said:

    Right now we have Sturgeon giving party political broadcasts for 30 minutes a day on prime time TV, we have her adopting the role of "nanny of the nation" keeping us safe from a largely non existent threat (2 people in ICUs in all of Scotland, no deaths for over a month now), we have a situation where the UK government has kept a lot of people employed through the furlough scheme and the Rishi Dishies initiative but remains pretty much invisible on the stage and we have a Labour party led by a Corbynite that has little in common with the new leader.

    All of this has boosted the SNP, despite their economic vandalism, their educational incompetence and the sad, sad state of Scottish public services. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But this state of affairs will not remain indefinitely. Unionists just need to grit their teeth and get on with it drawing attention to the multiple failings of the Scottish government until the message gets home. Not easy, I don't underestimate Sturgeon for a moment, but not impossible either.

    Economic activity here in Wales is remarkable and I expect it to be so in England

    Sturgeon's strangle hold on Scotland's economy, especially with winter on it's way, is going to see adverse comparisons with the rest of the UK with increasing job loses and business failures

    Let us see how that pans out with her ratings
    Hooray, reversion from 'Scotland's as shit as the rest of the UK' to 'Scotland's more shit than the rest of the UK' (and with bonus Sturgeon's honeymoon with voters over). Nature is healing.
    Do you agree with Sturgeon's balance of COVID vs the economy?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,595

    Foxy said:

    I see Steve Bannon is in a pickle. It was only a few weeks ago he was describing Dominic Cummings as a "brilliant guy", so DC will presumably be hoping there aren't too many unadvertised links to unearth.

    Ahem:

    https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1296461678528344067?s=09

    Facing Jail?

    That was a quick trial
    Yes, it is jumping the gun a bit, but Bannon was quite friendly with BoZo.

    https://twitter.com/nickreeves9876/status/1296468050263318531?s=09

    Bannon ripping off white racists seems to have been a step too far
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,023

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    Galloway has a point about the failure to hold Sturgeon and co to account.
    But Galloway is a narcissistic tit without a clue about contemporary Scotland, its media or politics.

    Ah, I see.
    Given that endorsement you'd think he'd be a perfect fit into the upper echelons of the SNP

    When is the incompetent John Swinney going to fall on his sword over the education shambles ?
    Well, are you going to tell us which newspapers are pro-SNP?

    Carnyx, you would be as well talking to a plank , it would be more sensible.
    It's a shame as I'd have been really pleased to know his perceptions of the Scottish [sic] media - there are some interesting surprises to be had from such conversations.
    I for one am dying to know which of these organs have changed tack since 2014.

    Against independence

    Daily Record (UK-wide)[12]
    City AM (UK-wide)[13]
    Daily Mirror (UK-wide)[14]
    The Herald (Scotland)[15]
    Scottish Daily Mail (Scotland)[16]
    Scotland on Sunday (Scotland)[17]
    Sunday Post (Scotland)[18]
    Sunday Telegraph (UK-wide)[19]
    The Daily Telegraph (UK-wide)[19]
    The Financial Times (UK-wide)[20]
    The Independent (UK-wide)[21]
    The Globe and Mail (Canada)[22]
    The Guardian (UK-wide)[23]
    The Morning Star (UK-wide)[24]
    The Scottish Daily Express (Scotland)[25]
    The Scottish Sunday Express (Scotland)[26]
    The Scotsman (Scotland)[27]
    The Shetland Times (Scotland)[28]
    The Sunday Times (UK-wide)[29]
    The Times (UK-wide)[30]
    Western Mail (Wales)[31]

    For independence

    Sunday Herald

    https://tinyurl.com/yyvf6v2q


    To be precise, and to avert the seemingly obvious qualification, the National wasn't around in indyref 1 (to which this list pertains, I rather assume) - it was first issued (as a daily version of the Sunday Herald, more or less) some time asfter that, though still just in 2014.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    DavidL said:

    Right now we have Sturgeon giving party political broadcasts for 30 minutes a day on prime time TV, we have her adopting the role of "nanny of the nation" keeping us safe from a largely non existent threat (2 people in ICUs in all of Scotland, no deaths for over a month now), we have a situation where the UK government has kept a lot of people employed through the furlough scheme and the Rishi Dishies initiative but remains pretty much invisible on the stage and we have a Labour party led by a Corbynite that has little in common with the new leader.

    All of this has boosted the SNP, despite their economic vandalism, their educational incompetence and the sad, sad state of Scottish public services. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. But this state of affairs will not remain indefinitely. Unionists just need to grit their teeth and get on with it drawing attention to the multiple failings of the Scottish government until the message gets home. Not easy, I don't underestimate Sturgeon for a moment, but not impossible either.

    Economic activity here in Wales is remarkable and I expect it to be so in England

    Sturgeon's strangle hold on Scotland's economy, especially with winter on it's way, is going to see adverse comparisons with the rest of the UK with increasing job loses and business failures

    Let us see how that pans out with her ratings
    She'll blame the Toe-reeeeeeeees
    I see you have a new recruit to the cult, your superiors will be pleased.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,575
    A max of 51% 'yes' is not exactly a wipeout. And we haven't yet had the debate on: debt, deficit, NATO, monarchy, Catalonia, entering the EU, Schengen, currency, ECB, hard borders at Gretna, exports to England, FoM, subsidy, oil, fish, and a few other things.

    Also worth noting that the constituencies at the border on both the England and Scotland side are a sea of blue with no exceptions.

    I hope Boris will stand firm against a second referendum.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
    The UK would not under any circumstance invade an independent Scotland. It would face a revolt if it did amongst its own people. For everyone like you will to send young men to go kill scots there are a lot more who would be standing in your way.
    It wouldn't be there to kill Scots - it would be there to evict or pre-empt Russian troop deployments or basing. The same would have happened to the Irish sea ports in WWII had the need ever arised.

    And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?

    For a start 8% of uk troops are from scotland, they would be on the other side. A good part of the other 92% is likely to know some of them and be reluctant to fight. Then you would have all the scots living in england not being very happy with the move, probably joined by a lot of the welsh, irish and cornish.

    Most people don't care what the military think they don't really see Putin as a big threat to their way of life and really wouldn't give a toss about their being an army camp no more than they did when american bases were set up. They would care about an invasion of Scotland as they would see it as akin to a civil war and would know to many people on both sides.

    All evidence this century shows the EU and NATO will do nothing about russia. Ask Crimea and the Ukraine. No one really cares apart from you and probably HYUFD.

    I suspect most are like me and if asked to rank the threats to their way of life would probably list them as

    1) The uk government
    2) China
    3) USA
    .....
    10099th Vladimir Putin
    Well put.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,588
    edited August 2020
    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424
    edited August 2020

    malcolmg said:

    I am amazed at times by the ignorance , bias and stupidity shown on here by supposedly intelligent people and nowadays they seem to be breeding and pushing out the sensible people.. It certainly shows why the UK is going down the pan. The sooner Scotland get out of it the better.

    There is a saying

    'You protest too much'

    Very true in your case Malc
    Still amazed G
    PS:I believe it is "Methinks you dost protest too much"
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,419
    What sins did Cumbria commit in a past life to deserve Kevin Maguire?
  • The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    I have no problem with a federal arrangement with concensus
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,588
    algarkirk said:

    A max of 51% 'yes' is not exactly a wipeout. And we haven't yet had the debate on: debt, deficit, NATO, monarchy, Catalonia, entering the EU, Schengen, currency, ECB, hard borders at Gretna, exports to England, FoM, subsidy, oil, fish, and a few other things.

    Also worth noting that the constituencies at the border on both the England and Scotland side are a sea of blue with no exceptions.

    I hope Boris will stand firm against a second referendum.

    You sound like a remoaner.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,192
    Foxy said:

    Bannon ripping off white racists seems to have been a step too far

    Are you saying siphoning off cash to your mates is not popular with the base?

    https://twitter.com/GuardianHeather/status/1296363972564844550
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,424

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    The major issue is surely not the number of crossings but the volume of traffic. 30,000 people cross the Northern Irish border every day; the Scottish border has 100,000 commuters alone, to say nothing of other traffic.
    All just bollox, it is only an issue if sad losers cannot stand losing their last colony and decide to be arseholes and cut off their nose to spite their face.
    It will be a NON issue.
    Colony ?

    You do realise the act of union with Scotland was purely voluntary and the Scots joined willingly.

    It’s not like Ireland.

    I get it you want out. I want you out too. I’m happy for Scotland to go its own way if that’s what a majority in the whole union wants. But a colony. LOL.
    You utter imbecilic moronic halfwitted loony , go online and read a history book. I will give you a clue start at 1707.
  • I've been saying this haven't I?

    The politics of the North is changing. Largely I think due to housing, housing is cheap up here and people can easily get on the housing ladder.

    I would like to see a breakdown of red wall home ownership rates but I bet they are probably most improved since 2010 and the Tories have been rewarded as a result.

    It is not all about Corbyn.
    This looks pretty convincing;

    https://www.citymetric.com/politics/how-age-and-economics-explains-why-northern-seats-workington-are-turning-tory-4879

    (Thesis is that Red Wall towns are experiencing a youth drain; young people leave Red Wall towns to study, and there's not much to draw them back afterwards. Combine that with the extreme age profile of voting intention, and Boris is your uncle.)
This discussion has been closed.