politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Scötterdämmerung. The Twilight of the Union?
Options
Comments
-
Lucky that is lightning speed for them , they are useless.Luckyguy1983 said:
9 years of DWP systems being the problem Malc? You could feed the data in less than 9 years if you fed it with a teaspoon.malcolmg said:
You forgot the bit where the delay was the DWP systems being unable to feed the data to Scotland, lies lies and lies , how very Tory.CarlottaVance said:
There HAS been action on further devolution - just the SNP government has delayed taking up the powers offered:Foxy said:
Since then the lack of action on further devolutionGallowgate said: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?
SNP Ministers have been urged to apologise after admitting it will take at least nine years to deliver a clutch of devolved social security benefits after yet another delay to the timetable. Opposition MSPs said the slow pace made a mockery of the SNP’s claim before the 2014 referendum that it could set up a fully independent state in just 18 months.
Under the 2016 Scotland Act that followed the No vote, Holyrood was given power over 11 benefits worth £3bn, roughly 15 per cent of social security spending north of the border. Despite criticising how the UK Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) oversees these benefits, SNP ministers have previously delayed delivering some of them because of the complexity of the process and the need to set up a new Scottish benefits agency.
However the Government promised they would be fully operational by the end of the current parliamentary term in 2021. But in a surprise Holyrood statement, Social Security Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said that, to get the system right, the group of benefits would not be fully devolved until 2024.
There could also be a further delay if ministers felt there was a risk to claimants.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17467830.snp-urged-apologise-devolved-benefits-delayed-2024/
Regurgitating the same old rubbish shows you unionists are a bust flush.0 -
Me for a start. You've insulted others and been rude as per always.Pagan2 said:
Well I have been on for several hours and I have insulted how many? Oh I think that would be 0. By objectionable you mean I voiced something you don't agree with I assume?CorrectHorseBattery said:Pagan spends his whole life on here being rude and objectionable to everyone, so it's about time somebody puts him down a peg.
0 -
I never said anything about a Parliament though.another_richard said:
You are.Gallowgate said:
Who’s talking about Yorkshire having a regional parliament?another_richard said:
I've never met anyone who wants a Yorkshire regional parliament.Gallowgate said:
He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
Or perhaps your legal training has progressed to the point where you can write something which means the exact opposite of what it seems to be.0 -
it applies to both sides and maybe time to share a truceCorrectHorseBattery said:
I've got nothing more to say but it's sad you only call out so-called childishness on one sideBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is all so childishMexicanpete said:
If you can I would quickly edit that.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright, you cunt!Pagan2 said:
gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright you cum stained oik!Pagan2 said:
Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it outCorrectHorseBattery said:
We'll have to see won't we.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
You going to apologise yet?1 -
Cornwall is a county not a countryanother_richard said:
The only thing I'm surprised to discover is that the Cornish give a damn about the union.Pagan2 said:
Is not the more important question why do we spend so much time arguing about it in our parliaments when frankly 70% of the country probably don't even think its an issue either way. I suspect that if you counted the actually give a damn pro union people in the country you would find they number less than pro av peopleGallowgate said: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?
The only people I have ever met that give a damn about the union either for or against are on here and scots, welsh and cornish. I have yet to hear anyone that is english in real everyday life treat scottish independence with more than a shrug of whatever we don't mind either way.0 -
I tried to, I apologised to him and you and everyone else and he just threw it straight back in my face.Big_G_NorthWales said:
it applies to both sides and maybe time to share a truceCorrectHorseBattery said:
I've got nothing more to say but it's sad you only call out so-called childishness on one sideBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is all so childishMexicanpete said:
If you can I would quickly edit that.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright, you cunt!Pagan2 said:
gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright you cum stained oik!Pagan2 said:
Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it outCorrectHorseBattery said:
We'll have to see won't we.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
You going to apologise yet?0 -
I will apologise for my bad language and won't say anymore on the topic for now, apologies to you all for interrupting your conversations.0
-
As I have said both of you need to agree a permanent truceCorrectHorseBattery said:
I tried to, I apologised to him and you and everyone else and he just threw it straight back in my face.Big_G_NorthWales said:
it applies to both sides and maybe time to share a truceCorrectHorseBattery said:
I've got nothing more to say but it's sad you only call out so-called childishness on one sideBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is all so childishMexicanpete said:
If you can I would quickly edit that.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright, you cunt!Pagan2 said:
gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright you cum stained oik!Pagan2 said:
Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it outCorrectHorseBattery said:
We'll have to see won't we.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
You going to apologise yet?2 -
You've worked hard to get a rise from CHB. You have succeeded and he will probably get a ban.Pagan2 said:
Sorry G not my doing though, just have a stalkerBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is all so childishMexicanpete said:
If you can I would quickly edit that.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright, you cunt!Pagan2 said:
gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright you cum stained oik!Pagan2 said:
Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it outCorrectHorseBattery said:
We'll have to see won't we.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
You going to apologise yet?
Whatever floats your boat I suppose.1 -
Care to share what I did today before CHB started in on me? Even then I responded without swearingBig_G_NorthWales said:
it applies to both sides and maybe time to share a truceCorrectHorseBattery said:
I've got nothing more to say but it's sad you only call out so-called childishness on one sideBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is all so childishMexicanpete said:
If you can I would quickly edit that.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright, you cunt!Pagan2 said:
gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright you cum stained oik!Pagan2 said:
Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it outCorrectHorseBattery said:
We'll have to see won't we.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
You going to apologise yet?0 -
regiments?HYUFD said:
To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etcanother_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
Not since the MoD closed all but one down.0 -
No its not a term to excuse its entirely meaningful. There's a reason the judicial system uses it, there's a reason why sports laws use it - and it should apply here too.another_richard said:
Benefit of the doubt is just a term to excuse doing what you want.Philip_Thompson said:
Not at all.another_richard said:
In which case the pupils with honest teachers have lost out.Philip_Thompson said:
Not at all Richard. The aim of grades is to judge the individual not the cohort.another_richard said:Its a remarkable coincidence that there were simultaneously an 'abler cohort' taking A levels this year and an 'abler cohort' taking GCSEs this year.
But what is strange is that the 'abler cohort' who took A levels this year showed no sign of being an 'abler cohort' two years ago when they took their GCSEs.
Hopefully someone will compare the 2018 GCSE results by school to the 2020 A levels results.
If a teacher is being honest - and if they lack 100% foresight of Mystic Meg - then should an honest teacher give benefit of doubt to the pupil or not?
If a teacher thinks that a student could get one of two different grades should they roll a dice or toss a coin to determine which they'd get? Or should the pupil get the benefit of the doubt?
We will hopefully be able to compare how much 'benefit of the doubt' was given from one school to another.
Still at least the 'abler cohort' line is no longer being mentioned.
If you had a child this year whom their teacher thought could have got an A, or could have got a B and the teacher didn't know which it would be - should the teacher have given the benefit of the doubt and award the A? Or toss a coin?
That's different from giving an A to students whom the teacher knew would get a B or lower. But there will always be edge cases and what should happen to them - give them the benefit of the doubt, or roll a dice to decide?0 -
If a ban is deserved for my behaviour then I'll have to live with it, hope you'll all accept my apology regardless.0
-
So British empire posturing and a bit of trade.HYUFD said:
To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etcanother_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You're going to have to come up with better than that.0 -
Not any longer. I was in Barrow Hospital last week and it has no Covid-19 patients.CarlottaVance said:
Is Cumbria still a COVID hot spot, or has that abated?TheScreamingEagles said:
Fingers crossed this happy state continues.0 -
On the latest poll from Yougov Scotland will have power over England.Gallowgate said: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?
Starmer will become PM thanks to 58 SNP MPs, along with PC, LDs and the SDLP and Greens propping him up despite the fact the Tories would still win a comfortable majority in England0 -
And since that day I have on several occasions made perfectly reasonable replies to comments he has made. I have not gone after him and he has persisted in going after me rather than engaging with what I said. I did not carry on the vendettaMexicanpete said:
You've worked hard to get a rise from CHB. You have succeeded and he will probably get a ban.Pagan2 said:
Sorry G not my doing though, just have a stalkerBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is all so childishMexicanpete said:
If you can I would quickly edit that.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright, you cunt!Pagan2 said:
gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright you cum stained oik!Pagan2 said:
Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it outCorrectHorseBattery said:
We'll have to see won't we.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
You going to apologise yet?
Whatever floats your boat I suppose.0 -
Good for you for apologising.CorrectHorseBattery said:I will apologise for my bad language and won't say anymore on the topic for now, apologies to you all for interrupting your conversations.
2 -
I really hope neither of you are bannedCorrectHorseBattery said:If a ban is deserved for my behaviour then I'll have to live with it, hope you'll all accept my apology regardless.
0 -
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.1 -
Best to just step back and let it go.CorrectHorseBattery said:I will apologise for my bad language and won't say anymore on the topic for now, apologies to you all for interrupting your conversations.
4 -
I will freely acknowledge I've got issues with lashing out sometimes and I am trying my best not to, sure it's not nice for you all to hear, so sorry again1
-
Going off for a bit to cool down2
-
So?HYUFD said:
On the latest poll from Yougov Scotland will have power over England.Gallowgate said: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?
Starmer will become PM thanks to 58 SNP MPs, along with PC, LDs and the SDLP and Greens propping him up despite the fact the Tories would still win a comfortable majority in England0 -
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!0 -
https://twitter.com/Doctor_Wurm/status/1295919718520545280?s=20HYUFD said:you would expect Yes to be on over 60%
0 -
Please come back soonCorrectHorseBattery said:Going off for a bit to cool down
2 -
Stop wittering one way or another and take a little time away from PB.CorrectHorseBattery said:If a ban is deserved for my behaviour then I'll have to live with it, hope you'll all accept my apology regardless.
The weather is nice so go for a walk and then have something nice to eat.
Do something positive and constructive and you will feel happier with the world.1 -
The brass neck to say we benefit from Barnett, we get a poxy share of OUR money back and they go on a spending spree with the rest. What a tool.Carnyx said:
regiments?HYUFD said:
To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etcanother_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
Not since the MoD closed all but one down.0 -
60% of Scottish exports go to England, if we go to WTO terms Brexit by January, the SNP win a Holyrood majority next year, Boris grants indyref2 and Yes win next September we will have tariffs on Scottish exports to England and vice versa and customs posts along the Scottish borders by Christmas 2021another_richard said:
So British empire posturing and a bit of trade.HYUFD said:
To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etcanother_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You're going to have to come up with better than that.0 -
You are one of PBs contrarians. Trolling individuals is a bit like bullying at school. People who indulge are best avoided, I find, in life and on the internet.Pagan2 said:
And since that day I have on several occasions made perfectly reasonable replies to comments he has made. I have not gone after him and he has persisted in going after me rather than engaging with what I said. I did not carry on the vendettaMexicanpete said:
You've worked hard to get a rise from CHB. You have succeeded and he will probably get a ban.Pagan2 said:
Sorry G not my doing though, just have a stalkerBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is all so childishMexicanpete said:
If you can I would quickly edit that.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright, you cunt!Pagan2 said:
gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright you cum stained oik!Pagan2 said:
Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it outCorrectHorseBattery said:
We'll have to see won't we.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
You going to apologise yet?
Whatever floats your boat I suppose.
CHB has a forthright opinion, but manages to argue quite sensibly with people of a diametrically opposing view. You like to get a bite, fair enough, if that's what you like to do.0 -
It probably reflects badly on me. But I really cannot get bothered by Scottish independence. It would, I suppose, be a shame because more constitutional and economic upheaval is the last thing anyone needs. But if that is what Scotland wants we should try and come to an amicable resolution and a new friendly relationship for the future. Probably a hopelessly naive view.1
-
You're not wrong. The buggers want a National Parliament!another_richard said:
I've never met anyone who wants a Yorkshire regional parliament.Gallowgate said:
He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.0 -
Good advice from Richard, CHB.another_richard said:
Stop wittering one way or another and take a little time away from PB.CorrectHorseBattery said:If a ban is deserved for my behaviour then I'll have to live with it, hope you'll all accept my apology regardless.
The weather is nice so go for a walk and then have something nice to eat.
Do something positive and constructive and you will feel happier with the world.0 -
Lucky you, pissing down hereanother_richard said:
Stop wittering one way or another and take a little time away from PB.CorrectHorseBattery said:If a ban is deserved for my behaviour then I'll have to live with it, hope you'll all accept my apology regardless.
The weather is nice so go for a walk and then have something nice to eat.
Do something positive and constructive and you will feel happier with the world.0 -
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union0 -
Good idea, enjoy the rest!CorrectHorseBattery said:Going off for a bit to cool down
0 -
Its an entirely reasonable view.Cyclefree said:It probably reflects badly on me. But I really cannot get bothered by Scottish independence. It would, I suppose, be a shame because more constitutional and economic upheaval is the last thing anyone needs. But if that is what Scotland wants we should try and come to an amicable resolution and a new friendly relationship for the future. Probably a hopelessly naive view.
Its also a view the Europeans took with Brexit. They didn't freak out, nobody resigned for having "lost" Britain. They respected a decision was made and moved on.0 -
So you will have to import them from elsewhere and pay bigger tariffs you halfwit.HYUFD said:
60% of Scottish exports go to England, if we go to WTO terms Brexit by January, the SNP win a Holyrood majority next year, Boris grants indyref2 and Yes win next September we will have tariffs on Scottish exports to England and vice versa and customs posts along the Scottish borders by Christmas 2021another_richard said:
So British empire posturing and a bit of trade.HYUFD said:
To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etcanother_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You're going to have to come up with better than that.0 -
The edges tend to get ever wider when you give people free rein to decide on benefit of the doubt.Philip_Thompson said:
No its not a term to excuse its entirely meaningful. There's a reason the judicial system uses it, there's a reason why sports laws use it - and it should apply here too.another_richard said:
Benefit of the doubt is just a term to excuse doing what you want.Philip_Thompson said:
Not at all.another_richard said:
In which case the pupils with honest teachers have lost out.Philip_Thompson said:
Not at all Richard. The aim of grades is to judge the individual not the cohort.another_richard said:Its a remarkable coincidence that there were simultaneously an 'abler cohort' taking A levels this year and an 'abler cohort' taking GCSEs this year.
But what is strange is that the 'abler cohort' who took A levels this year showed no sign of being an 'abler cohort' two years ago when they took their GCSEs.
Hopefully someone will compare the 2018 GCSE results by school to the 2020 A levels results.
If a teacher is being honest - and if they lack 100% foresight of Mystic Meg - then should an honest teacher give benefit of doubt to the pupil or not?
If a teacher thinks that a student could get one of two different grades should they roll a dice or toss a coin to determine which they'd get? Or should the pupil get the benefit of the doubt?
We will hopefully be able to compare how much 'benefit of the doubt' was given from one school to another.
Still at least the 'abler cohort' line is no longer being mentioned.
If you had a child this year whom their teacher thought could have got an A, or could have got a B and the teacher didn't know which it would be - should the teacher have given the benefit of the doubt and award the A? Or toss a coin?
That's different from giving an A to students whom the teacher knew would get a B or lower. But there will always be edge cases and what should happen to them - give them the benefit of the doubt, or roll a dice to decide?
Which is why I'd like to see a comparison between schools on how their grades have changed.0 -
I am not a contrarian I argue what I believe is correct from my viewpoint. I do not take positions because I support labour or I support Tory. I have certainly at times gone against people from all sides. I have also agreed with people from all sides on issues and posted things that support them.Mexicanpete said:
You are one of PBs contrarians. Trolling individuals is a bit like bullying at school. People who indulge are best avoided, I find, in life and on the internet.Pagan2 said:
And since that day I have on several occasions made perfectly reasonable replies to comments he has made. I have not gone after him and he has persisted in going after me rather than engaging with what I said. I did not carry on the vendettaMexicanpete said:
You've worked hard to get a rise from CHB. You have succeeded and he will probably get a ban.Pagan2 said:
Sorry G not my doing though, just have a stalkerBig_G_NorthWales said:
It is all so childishMexicanpete said:
If you can I would quickly edit that.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright, you cunt!Pagan2 said:
gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Alright you cum stained oik!Pagan2 said:
Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it outCorrectHorseBattery said:
We'll have to see won't we.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
You going to apologise yet?
Whatever floats your boat I suppose.
CHB has a forthright opinion, but manages to argue quite sensibly with people of a diametrically opposing view. You like to get a bite, fair enough, if that's what you like to do.
I did not set out to needle CHB judge for yourself this was my first post responding to him tonight
Not I think an unreasonable response nor a goading onePagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
0 -
I may be flogging a dead horse (battery?) but as I said the other night, these partisan articles that have become commonplace in the last few years are doing this site no good.
You can see that from the comments produced below the line. Also precious little to do with betting. Just very frustrating and tedious to read.
TSE may think throwing in some reference to some obscure historical figure gives the article gravitas. It doesn’t.0 -
How much more autonomy could they have ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union0 -
More tax raising powersMartin_Kinsella said:
How much more autonomy could they have ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union0 -
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin1 -
Up to your usual high standard of ignorance , congratulations.Martin_Kinsella said:
How much more autonomy could they have ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union0 -
Its a farcical idea anyway that if Scotland has a referendum by September that there'd be customs posts up by Christmas of the same year anyway. As if there wouldn't be negotiations and a transition period let alone any agreements?malcolmg said:
So you will have to import them from elsewhere and pay bigger tariffs you halfwit.HYUFD said:
60% of Scottish exports go to England, if we go to WTO terms Brexit by January, the SNP win a Holyrood majority next year, Boris grants indyref2 and Yes win next September we will have tariffs on Scottish exports to England and vice versa and customs posts along the Scottish borders by Christmas 2021another_richard said:
So British empire posturing and a bit of trade.HYUFD said:
To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etcanother_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You're going to have to come up with better than that.
The UK voted to leave the EU in 2016 and there's still no customs posts up. In the extremely unlikely idea that there'd be customs posts up on the English/Scottish border they'd simply not be up before 2025 or so at the earliest.
Foreseeable timetable for me.
May 2021: Holyrood election - negotiations begin.
2022: IndyRef2
2022-2024 two year negotiation period.
2025 Scotland becomes independent. Probably with some sort of transition agreement.
Maybe that timeline could be expedited a bit to get Scottish independence at around the May 2024 time that the UK has its election so Scotland isn't electing MPs - but it can't be done much faster than that.0 -
You cannot be as daft as you make out you are, it must be in jest.HYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me1 -
Kinder politics nationalist style.malcolmg said:
Up to your usual high standard of ignorance , congratulations.Martin_Kinsella said:
How much more autonomy could they have ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union0 -
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
A more meaningful comparison is between individuals. How many pupils who got a C-equivalent in GCSE maths were rewarded an A at A-level? How many pupils were within one grade of what should have otherwise been expected?another_richard said:
The edges tend to get ever wider when you give people free rein to decide on benefit of the doubt.Philip_Thompson said:
No its not a term to excuse its entirely meaningful. There's a reason the judicial system uses it, there's a reason why sports laws use it - and it should apply here too.another_richard said:
Benefit of the doubt is just a term to excuse doing what you want.Philip_Thompson said:
Not at all.another_richard said:
In which case the pupils with honest teachers have lost out.Philip_Thompson said:
Not at all Richard. The aim of grades is to judge the individual not the cohort.another_richard said:Its a remarkable coincidence that there were simultaneously an 'abler cohort' taking A levels this year and an 'abler cohort' taking GCSEs this year.
But what is strange is that the 'abler cohort' who took A levels this year showed no sign of being an 'abler cohort' two years ago when they took their GCSEs.
Hopefully someone will compare the 2018 GCSE results by school to the 2020 A levels results.
If a teacher is being honest - and if they lack 100% foresight of Mystic Meg - then should an honest teacher give benefit of doubt to the pupil or not?
If a teacher thinks that a student could get one of two different grades should they roll a dice or toss a coin to determine which they'd get? Or should the pupil get the benefit of the doubt?
We will hopefully be able to compare how much 'benefit of the doubt' was given from one school to another.
Still at least the 'abler cohort' line is no longer being mentioned.
If you had a child this year whom their teacher thought could have got an A, or could have got a B and the teacher didn't know which it would be - should the teacher have given the benefit of the doubt and award the A? Or toss a coin?
That's different from giving an A to students whom the teacher knew would get a B or lower. But there will always be edge cases and what should happen to them - give them the benefit of the doubt, or roll a dice to decide?
Which is why I'd like to see a comparison between schools on how their grades have changed.0 -
Keeping Scotland in the union against its wishes is force though. That’s my point.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union0 -
Have you just dreamed that?HYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
So remove the halfway house at the moment and give them full autonomy on raising revenue ? Would you go that far ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
More tax raising powersMartin_Kinsella said:
How much more autonomy could they have ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union0 -
I think the only tenable English devolution is to give a lot more powers to mayors and county councils. We have no other tradition of regionalism and everything else is artificial.Gallowgate said:
Who’s talking about Yorkshire having a regional parliament?another_richard said:
I've never met anyone who wants a Yorkshire regional parliament.Gallowgate said:
He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.Pagan2 said:
He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolvedCorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
My own replacement would be to replace the Lords with a chamber of County representatives, not directly elected, but appointed by councils from county councillors, perhaps 1 per 200 000 population. As well as ensuring all areas represented, it may well improve the standard of people running local government.
1 -
Cornish nationalism is the one kind that's died down recently.Pagan2 said:
Is not the more important question why do we spend so much time arguing about it in our parliaments when frankly 70% of the country probably don't even think its an issue either way. I suspect that if you counted the actually give a damn pro union people in the country you would find they number less than pro av peopleGallowgate said: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?
The only people I have ever met that give a damn about the union either for or against are on here and scots, welsh and cornish. I have yet to hear anyone that is english in real everyday life treat scottish independence with more than a shrug of whatever we don't mind either way.0 -
I just can't stop laughing BigG. Genuinely!Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me0 -
HYUFD's ignorance is breathtakingPagan2 said:
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin1 -
English "remoaners" do too..Gallowgate said: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.
https://twitter.com/timfarron/status/1296145970837819393?s=201 -
Well said.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me0 -
Trouble is, he is serious and is a chairman of a conservative constituency associationMexicanpete said:
I just can't stop laughing BigG. Genuinely!Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me0 -
Yes and compete with RUK if they want toMartin_Kinsella said:
So remove the halfway house at the moment and give them full autonomy on raising revenue ? Would you go that far ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
More tax raising powersMartin_Kinsella said:
How much more autonomy could they have ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union1 -
The comedy value of your scenario is superb. I genuinely hope you wrote it to generate a laugh. If you did- respect!HYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
The Len Deighton of Epping Forest!0 -
Most of Eastern Europe is in NATO, if Scotland withdrew from NATO and gave up its nuclear deterrent it would leave itself vulnerablePagan2 said:
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
agreePhilip_Thompson said:
Its a farcical idea anyway that if Scotland has a referendum by September that there'd be customs posts up by Christmas of the same year anyway. As if there wouldn't be negotiations and a transition period let alone any agreements?malcolmg said:
So you will have to import them from elsewhere and pay bigger tariffs you halfwit.HYUFD said:
60% of Scottish exports go to England, if we go to WTO terms Brexit by January, the SNP win a Holyrood majority next year, Boris grants indyref2 and Yes win next September we will have tariffs on Scottish exports to England and vice versa and customs posts along the Scottish borders by Christmas 2021another_richard said:
So British empire posturing and a bit of trade.HYUFD said:
To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etcanother_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You're going to have to come up with better than that.
The UK voted to leave the EU in 2016 and there's still no customs posts up. In the extremely unlikely idea that there'd be customs posts up on the English/Scottish border they'd simply not be up before 2025 or so at the earliest.
Foreseeable timetable for me.
May 2021: Holyrood election - negotiations begin.
2022: IndyRef2
2022-2024 two year negotiation period.
2025 Scotland becomes independent. Probably with some sort of transition agreement.
Maybe that timeline could be expedited a bit to get Scottish independence at around the May 2024 time that the UK has its election so Scotland isn't electing MPs - but it can't be done much faster than that.0 -
Why would Comrade Putin be bothered ?Mexicanpete said:
Have you just dreamed that?HYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!0 -
Vulnerable to what exactly? What countries anywhere the opposite side of the globe have been annexed by 'a few paratroopers'?HYUFD said:
Most of Eastern Europe is is NATO, if Scotland withdrew from NATO and gave up its nuclear deterrent it would leave itself vulnerablePagan2 said:
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Madness.0 -
A pact with Eck?Martin_Kinsella said:
Why would Comrade Putin be bothered ?Mexicanpete said:
Have you just dreamed that?HYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
It's not over yet, but a second referendum is coming.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.
There are still solutions to save the Union, although they will of course get mocked or shouted down vociferously by nationalist posters on here.
If Scotland can be happy members of a European Union then they can be happy members of a British Union too. The question is the constitutional design.
It's better economically (and more secure and safe) for both Scotland and England to be in a common market, with a common currency, and with a common defence and security policy. It also gives macroeconomic strength and resilience to both too.
There could be perhaps be more flexibility or co-decision making on foreign policy and foreign deployments. British passports could be branded "Scotland" as Isle of Man or Channel Islands are too with a different design.0 -
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!0 -
Chairman of my branch not the full associationBig_G_NorthWales said:
Trouble is, he is serious and is a chairman of a conservative constituency associationMexicanpete said:
I just can't stop laughing BigG. Genuinely!Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me0 -
I am polite but your ravings are monstrous and not a credit to the party or the position you hold in itHYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!
I would certainly stand against you if I lived in your constituency and was younger0 -
You can't be serious. This is comedy gold.HYUFD said:
Most of Eastern Europe is in NATO, if Scotland withdrew from NATO and gave up its nuclear deterrent it would leave itself vulnerablePagan2 said:
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
No-one is arguing for preserving it by force.Gallowgate said:
Keeping Scotland in the union against its wishes is force though. That’s my point.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Force is a nonsenseGallowgate said:
By force?algarkirk said:
To preserve the unity of an island called Britain instead of splitting it up.another_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You WILL be united!!
There are plenty of economic, emotional and family reason to continue in the union but I do think Scotland should have more autonomy within the union
That's not who we are. We're not Spain.0 -
So will Scotland on exports from England, while facing a big threat to exports to its biggest marketmalcolmg said:
So you will have to import them from elsewhere and pay bigger tariffs you halfwit.HYUFD said:
60% of Scottish exports go to England, if we go to WTO terms Brexit by January, the SNP win a Holyrood majority next year, Boris grants indyref2 and Yes win next September we will have tariffs on Scottish exports to England and vice versa and customs posts along the Scottish borders by Christmas 2021another_richard said:
So British empire posturing and a bit of trade.HYUFD said:
To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etcanother_richard said:What is the Union for ?
To preserve the Hanoverian succession
To safeguard the Protestant religion
To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
To provide 40+ Labour MPs
It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
You're going to have to come up with better than that.0 -
We’ve yet to see what his next move is and what havoc he’ll cause for the nats.Mexicanpete said:
A pact with Eck?Martin_Kinsella said:
Why would Comrade Putin be bothered ?Mexicanpete said:
Have you just dreamed that?HYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
Only one letting down the tory party here is you HYUFD. You consistently take repugnant views which makes even right wingers like me go wtf. You consistently change tack saying something will never happen because its tories in charge then when they do it anyway its like you always supported it. You are a blind follower. Your party wrong or right. I don't care what side people are on I do care they think for themselves and when the opposition is right they support it out of principle and when your party is wrong you denounce it out of principle.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!
The problem with politics in this country is there are far too many people like you involved.
3 -
I don't think we should engaged with a George Galloway supporter.0
-
I think a lot of European countries are secretly grateful they can shield themselves behind the NATO nuclear umbrella.Mexicanpete said:
You can't be serious. This is comedy gold.HYUFD said:
Most of Eastern Europe is in NATO, if Scotland withdrew from NATO and gave up its nuclear deterrent it would leave itself vulnerablePagan2 said:
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
Nonsense. English and Welsh soldiers would be more than willing to help defend an independent Scotland from foreign invasion, to suggest otherwise is ridiculous. Whether we are in political union is irrelevant.HYUFD said:
Most of Eastern Europe is in NATO, if Scotland withdrew from NATO and gave up its nuclear deterrent it would leave itself vulnerablePagan2 said:
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin0 -
Good, bring it on.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am polite but your ravings are monstrous and not a credit to the party or the position you hold in itHYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!
I would certainly stand against you if I lived in your constituency and was younger
The Tories have always supported NATO membership and the nuclear deterrent for a reason, if you now go off at me for staying that simple fact it shows you are not really a conservative anyway0 -
There’s no reason why we cannot have a British Isles version of NATO.1
-
True, but in or out of the Union and Nato, I am sure the good old English Tommy will save Scotland from the Cossack marauders!Casino_Royale said:
I think a lot of European countries are secretly grateful they can shield themselves behind the NATO nuclear umbrella.Mexicanpete said:
You can't be serious. This is comedy gold.HYUFD said:
Most of Eastern Europe is in NATO, if Scotland withdrew from NATO and gave up its nuclear deterrent it would leave itself vulnerablePagan2 said:
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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 Putin1 -
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!0 -
I am far more a compassionate and sane conservative than you can ever beHYUFD said:
Good, bring it on.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am polite but your ravings are monstrous and not a credit to the party or the position you hold in itHYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!
I would certainly stand against you if I lived in your constituency and was younger
The Tories have always supported NATO membership and the nuclear deterrent for a reason, if you now go off at me for staying that simple fact it shows you are not really a conservative anyway
You are an example of the poison inflicting the right in this country0 -
Russia is on the same continent not the other side of the world.Philip_Thompson said:
Vulnerable to what exactly? What countries anywhere the opposite side of the globe have been annexed by 'a few paratroopers'?HYUFD said:
Most of Eastern Europe is is NATO, if Scotland withdrew from NATO and gave up its nuclear deterrent it would leave itself vulnerablePagan2 said:
Sighs Putin probably has no interest in annexing scotland, its disconnected from territory and as armies have always found distant colonies are hard to keep hold of. If he is a threat to anywhere it would be eastern europe and I doubt he even wants most of that. Russia is a paper tiger largely in terms of taking europe. The amount of oil and gas scotland has is neglible in terms of what russia already has access toHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Madness.
The Nazis captured the Netherlands largely by paratroopers in WW20 -
And I hope you are expelled once the party gains it's compassionHYUFD said:
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!0 -
We have to wait that long?Big_G_NorthWales said:
And I hope you are expelled once the party gains it's compassionHYUFD said:
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!1 -
There is nothing uncompassionate about retaining NATO membership and the nuclear deterrent, it is simple military common senseBig_G_NorthWales said:
And I hope you are expelled once the party gains it's compassionHYUFD said:
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!0 -
I will send your application for sainthood to the PopeBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am far more a compassionate and sane conservative than you can ever beHYUFD said:
Good, bring it on.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am polite but your ravings are monstrous and not a credit to the party or the position you hold in itHYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!
I would certainly stand against you if I lived in your constituency and was younger
The Tories have always supported NATO membership and the nuclear deterrent for a reason, if you now go off at me for staying that simple fact it shows you are not really a conservative anyway
You are an example of the poison inflicting the right in this country2 -
I would not argue if it was earlierIanB2 said:
We have to wait that long?Big_G_NorthWales said:
And I hope you are expelled once the party gains it's compassionHYUFD said:
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!
HYUFD's views disturb me0 -
This group is getting all very personal at the moment. Never used to be like this. It’s one step removed from a Facebook politics group which is sad.IanB2 said:
We have to wait that long?Big_G_NorthWales said:
And I hope you are expelled once the party gains it's compassionHYUFD said:
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!1 -
Mine wasnt intended to be taken seriously, and was more political than personal.Martin_Kinsella said:
This group is getting all very personal at the moment. Never used to be like this. It’s one step removed from a Facebook politics group which is sad.IanB2 said:
We have to wait that long?Big_G_NorthWales said:
And I hope you are expelled once the party gains it's compassionHYUFD said:
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!
I agree the tone of several of the debates below is disappointing. It's almost as if Sean has arrived early, without so many long words.0 -
People have become more polarised here as politics has become more polarised. I am not sure that can be avoided. I personally have hope though over the last couple of years I have seen an increase of people here more ready to criticize the party they are a member of, and more willing to say this is no longer my party it has deserted me. This however has also led to more of the "My party right or wrong" mindset amongst some as a reaction.Martin_Kinsella said:
This group is getting all very personal at the moment. Never used to be like this. It’s one step removed from a Facebook politics group which is sad.IanB2 said:
We have to wait that long?Big_G_NorthWales said:
And I hope you are expelled once the party gains it's compassionHYUFD said:
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!0 -
@HYUFD why do you think England and Wales wouldn’t want to defend Scotland from foreign attack? Spite?
We sacrificed 380k soldiers in the defence of Czechoslovakia in WW2.
Let’s be real - England would always, to the best of its ability, guarantee Scottish independence, through use of its nuclear deterrent or otherwise.
There is too much shared history to suggest otherwise.
I’m willing to bet that if the ROI was threatened even now, the public would be massively in support of defending them whatever it takes.0 -
The choice between the true zealot and the long term sceptic who nevertheless caved and voted for it all, just the same, isn't an easy one.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I would not argue if it was earlierIanB2 said:
We have to wait that long?Big_G_NorthWales said:
And I hope you are expelled once the party gains it's compassionHYUFD said:
Of course it does, as does Labour why else was Alistair Campbell suspended when he voted LD at the 2019 European elections and why else did the same happen to Heseltine with the Tories, Ann Widdecombe was expelled as soon as she backed the Brexit PartyPhilip_Thompson said:
No the party doesn't value loyalty above all else. Anything that does isn't fit to deserve loyalty.HYUFD said:
Frankly I have had enough of your pomposity and refusal to engage in facts rather than just insult me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are beyond idiotic and a disgrace to the conservative partyHYUFD said:
Scotland has a lot of oil, if an Independent Scotland gave up its nuclear deterrent and left NATO Putin could quickly send a few paratroopers and carriers and subs to Scotland and take it overPagan2 said:
And you think an independent scotland is going to stand by while uk troops wander in?Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.malcolmg said:
You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.Casino_Royale 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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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.Casino_Royale 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 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.
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?
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.
Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
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
Time letters were sent in to have you removed from your position
Frankly, you disgust me
From someone who used to be polite BigG you have gone downhill rapidly and I will take no lectures from you about threats to my party position when you refused to even vote Conservative in 2001 but voted Labour, the party values loyalty above all else!!
HYUFD's views disturb me0 -
They might but I don't think English mothers would exactly be rushing to send their boys to potential death to defend a Scotland which voted to Leave the UK, then to leave NATO and nor would an English PM necessarily want to risk nuclear holocaust to defend a country other than their own.Gallowgate said:@HYUFD why do you think England and Wales wouldn’t want to defend Scotland from foreign attack? Spite?
We sacrificed 380k soldiers in the defence of Czechoslovakia in WW2.
Let’s be real - England would always, to the best of its ability, guarantee Scottish independence, through use of its nuclear deterrent or otherwise.
There is too much shared history to suggest otherwise.
I’m willing to bet that if the ROI was threatened even now, the public would be massively in support of defending them whatever it takes.
If Scotland remained in NATO and kept its nuclear deterrent however English and Welsh support for Scotland against invasion would be guaranteed0 -
This discussion has been closed.