Scottish Independence

[jaggybunnet]

There's no doubt that there would be advantages for the UK's Royal Navy. The only real alternative from memory is Devonport (I'm sure that there was much debate about where the Astute class submarines were to be based, and Neptune was very happy it went there).

 

There would certainly be a negotiation to be had. If it were the SNP negotiating I'm sure they'd want rid of Trident warheads from Coulport and therefore that does throw the status of Faslane into doubt. And it's difficult to predict the extent and character of the Scottish Navy. Picturing 1/12th of the Royal Navy wouldn't require much infrastructure at all.

 

I also wouldn't discount the political pressure that the UK will be under to retain their own establishments. Several are scheduled to be closed or mothballed that were competing with the likes of Lossiemouth and Leuchars, and there would be much political pressure to divert limited UK investment to these locations. It's already there...

 

 

[jaggybunnet]

sorry forgot to add before i got side tracked , why would the thousands of scottish armed forces vote for something that would make them jobless? no not all jobs would go BUT you wouldnt know if yours was safe.

[Mr Scruff]

I think that would be one of the problems for the SNP. They currently take a very anti-nuclear position (both power and weapons), and I'm sure that a large majority of SNP voters would want nuclear weapons out of Scotland. But then who steps into the void that would be created in Helensburgh and the area surrounding Faslane by the Navy withdrawing? I'm sure in the end there would be a deal to be made - Faslane is advantageous for the Navy, and there would be political fall-out in England from re-locating nuclear submarines somewhere down there. The SNP are pragmatists - they would be able to sell is as negotiating a 'good deal for Scotland' without actually altering the status quo that much.

I just don't think the SNP can live with nuclear warheads based at Coulport. So Vanguard class SSNs (and their replacement) go from Neptune to Devonport where they're currently refitted anyway. Popular move down there. Comacchio group would follow. Would the UK government take out a lease for astute class SSNs at Neptune? Maybe but it'd have to be a good deal for them. Or Devonport would be perfectly happy to see them replace the Trafalger class units down there. It's really just (not easy I know) a question of where they'd store the warheads. Considering the likely shape of the Scottish Navy, can't see a need for Rosyth and Faslane and not at their current scales. Don't get me wrong, worth trying to do a deal (sell the UK a 99 year lease of Faslane and Rosneath?), but it'd be a tough deal. You're spot on about the SNP being pragmatists, but I do wonder how much this will extend to nuclear weapons.

 

This would be repeated for Lossiemouth (JSF and Typhoon) and Leuchars (Army). The main thing the UK will probably look for are access to monitoring and s&r facilities, but not a lot of value for us.

 

One things for sure. We will have more establishments than we can fill.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Mr Scruff

[Mr Scruff]

Let's press a few of Woody's buttons and talk of the neo-liberal SNP; another pro-establishment party that's not to be trusted IMO. Some musings from the People's Republic of Kilbarchan - which is a lie as the SNP rule supreme in this part of the World; but they've yet to convert me and probably never will...

I thought we were Labour (Douglas Alexander and that guy Henry?

 

Otherwise (sorry - snipped) a fair analysis. Although I'm in the 'no' camp I could be convinced if we were to ultimately achieve a vibrant, dynamic and inclusive economy. But this is where you and I differ (apart from the fact that I go to the Glenleven - it's closer) - I'm completely opposed to state control of the economy. Don't believe it works. And yes, as you imply it would be even less workable in a small economy like Scotland...

Edited September 8, 2011 by Mr Scruff

[Mr Scruff]

sorry forgot to add before i got side tracked , why would the thousands of scottish armed forces vote for something that would make them jobless? no not all jobs would go BUT you wouldnt know if yours was safe.

If there's one thing the SNP could probably care less about (sorry) it's the votes of Scottish members of the British armed forces. Different when it comes to those communities and economies surrounding the larger Defence Estates establishments around Kinloss Lossiemouth, Leuchars, Rosyth etc. I suspect we'll hear a Scottish version of 'swords into ploughshares' when we start to get the full detailed argument from the government.

[jaggybunnet]

If there's one thing the SNP could probably care less about (sorry) it's the votes of Scottish members of the British armed forces. Different when it comes to those communities and economies surrounding the larger Defence Estates establishments around Kinloss Lossiemouth, Leuchars, Rosyth etc. I suspect we'll hear a Scottish version of 'swords into ploughshares' when we start to get the full detailed argument from the government.

 

amazing how the reformation of the old Scottish regiments (its in there manifesto) has now gone quite and talking to some snp they said they would be going for a smaller army doesn't really fit does it.

 

 

this is just one small (very small) part of why i don't think it would work

[Guy Incognito]

The other serious point - touched upon but not analysed in detail (I'd end up in a game of ping pong with WJ with JB probably probably putting the jackboot in, quoting from his Gestapo handbook and threatening to invade from the East) is that the West of Scotland needs one heck of a lot of money to keep society stable. And look at how great things are just now! Even with cuts, employment in the public sector remains high (one in four) and this all requires tax payer funding. The debate here, of course, is why is this the case and I'd probably end up coming to metaphorical blows with some of my sparring partners on this DG whilst boring the a*** off many with lengthy posts.

Possibly because most of west central Scotland's traditional industries have died off, leaving behind a large, relatively well-educated population base. The UK government thinks to itself: "we have all these jobs that need doing but accommodation in London costs a fortune, so let's open an office in Glasgow - it'll be much cheaper there".

[Meister Jag]

I thought we were Labour (Douglas Alexander and that guy Henry?

 

Otherwise (sorry - snipped) a fair analysis. Although I'm in the 'no' camp I could be convinced if we were to ultimately achieve a vibrant, dynamic and inclusive economy. But this is where you and I differ (apart from the fact that I go to the Glenleven - it's closer) - I'm completely opposed to state control of the economy. Don't believe it works. And yes, as you imply it would be even less workable in a small economy like Scotland...

 

It's been just over an hour and no response from WJ; I fear the worst. He'll be reading up on Danny Alexander's Twitter blog 'I had a poached egg with toast today and it was yum, then went for a number two; but forgot to ask George the Big "O" if it was okay, but I did wash my hands...'

 

Anyway in response, you're right about the N Labour local MPs / MSP, we have Dougie and Hugh respectively. The latter used to be a member of Militant but would now deny it under torture; I used to sell 'the paper' with him on Paisley High Street. Now he's reinvented himself as all things New Labour and is more than happy to deny his socialist past. What was that about power corrupting... But locally and in cooncil terms, the SNP is very active - Colin Campbell and Bruce McPhee are both ex-MSPs and both stay in the village. The local SNP branch is also apparently very active.

 

I actually don't have a great problem with the SNP, I just view them as just another enemy of the oppressed class

 

I also tend to drink in the Glenleven and am occasionally to be found in there in the company of a wee bearded St Mirren fan of the far-left persuasion. We have a shared interest in music and some shared political views; although I stop short at planned show trials and executions for crimes against the working class! I mean, life's short enough...

 

You think I'm bad, spend some time in this wee guy's company... you may know who I'm on about? Rumour has it that he was once the Paisley Panda (St M mascot) and was lifted for throwing bars of soap at Morton fans. An urban myth as far as I'm concerned as he'd never have got into the outfit and used to chain smoke in those days. But when in court, rumour has it that when asked to explain his actions he said he was "at the cutting edge of football mascotry"! But one of the good guys and an old comrade.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Meister Jag

[Meister Jag]

Possibly because most of west central Scotland's traditional industries have died off, leaving behind a large, relatively well-educated population base. The UK government thinks to itself: "we have all these jobs that need doing but accommodation in London costs a fortune, so let's open an office in Glasgow - it'll be much cheaper there".

 

Totally agree, open a call centre and say we've cracked our unemployment problem! I'd love to hear the SNP saying that we've brought 'x' amount of manufacturing jobs to Scotland with 'x' amount of guaranteed apprenticeships. Sad thing is, it ain't going to happen and as you say education is all that's on offer... followed by service sector jobs if you can find them.

[Meister Jag]

amazing how the reformation of the old Scottish regiments (its in there manifesto) has now gone quite and talking to some snp they said they would be going for a smaller army doesn't really fit does it.

 

 

this is just one small (very small) part of why i don't think it would work

 

Serious point, if we ever gained independence then I'm sure what's left of the British armed forces would be more than happy to take Scottish recruits. Probably no problem with swearing allegiance to the Crown as we'd still be linked through the Commonwealth etc.

 

Oh and in terms of navy bases; depending on what independence really means, wouldn't HM still own the coastline so would get to keep her nuclear bases. Have I missed something? I mean we're not exactly going to build a wall and all that.

[Guy Incognito]

Let's press a few of Woody's buttons and talk of the neo-liberal SNP; another pro-establishment party that's not to be trusted IMO. Some musings from the People's Republic of Kilbarchan - which is a lie as the SNP rule supreme in this part of the World; but they've yet to convert me and probably never will...

 

Upon analysis the British bourgeoisie is by no means as obsessed with the constitutional form of the existing nation‑state as the pro‑independence wing of the Scottish left; which includes a small faction within the SNP. Britain’s capitalists are interested only in maintaining their class power — the national context through which they do so is less important to them. Power is money and that's what drives them; think Murrayfield in your kilt or a bit of 90-minute patriotism at Hampden, but with corporate hospitality thrown in. This, of course, isn't to say that they would enthusiastically embrace independence, or that it would be their first choice as what really matters is where the shekels are. So should it ever happen, independence probably wouldn't pose an insuperable problem for them, still less for the transnational capitalist class as a whole. (Apologies if that's a bit heavy on the Marxist speak!)

 

Claims that globalisation is reducing the autonomy of states are undoubtedly exaggerated, but this process certainly intensifies the pressures that world markets have always exercised over even moderate reforming regimes. Scotland would be no exception as the fortunes of the Scottish economy depend much more on what happens outside its borders than nations and countries of greater size.

 

A few bourgeois ideologues actually see advantages in independence. The Economist and a couple of heavyweight broadsheet columnists has been arguing for years that, in capitalist terms, ‘standing on its own two feet’ should be something that Scotland should aspire to. I guess their devious point is that when deprived of the subsidies which supposedly allow the Scots to maintain higher levels of public sector employment and marginally better social provision than the rest of the UK, they would finally be forced to accept economic reality and live within their means.

 

An SNP-led independent government would not use the same rhetoric, of course, but the party is already moving towards the same types of policies as the coalition government. The leadership uses social democratic language, but is quick to add that it will continue to hold out bribes to capitalists to encourage investment. Salmond is on record as saying that he thinks 'private profit is entirely admirable' and in his world maybe it is. But this this to my mind confirms that the SNP is no left of centre party; basically a bunch of cowboy opportunists who have been able to fill the void left by p*** poor performing Westminster parties. I'll be honest here: there is no alternative and the so-called left always ends up fighting and is a shocking mess. So who can blame the SNP for its opportunism.

 

Both wings of the SNP are committed to neo-liberalism and I recall an SNP economic spokesperson called Jim Mather saying that 'We should not apologise for encouraging wealth creation and success… We want more millionaires and any notion that an independent Scotland would be a left wing country is delusional nonsense'. In the same article he then went on to pretty much hint at shrinking the Scottish civil service, outsourcing work and reducing the size of local government etc. All we've got to do is to give them the independence mandate and let them get on with it.. And you wonder why many folk don't bother voting. I mean what's the point, one lot are as bad as the other. In all respects, just another political party who will claim they have to balance the books by making difficult decisions. Salmond / Milliband / Cameron - same neo-liberal.

 

So I guess no real prospect of a socialist republic and no real change to anyone's day-to-day existence. There is, of course, an alternative but the voice of the left is a bit muted these days. Oh and wee Tommy is still banged up!

 

If that doesn't press a few buttons then I'm giving up... WJ, JB and others.

It is a shame for the far-left in Scotland that Sheridan's ego (and libido) essentially facilitated its implosion. In the first couple of Holyrood parliaments they won quite a few list seats, IIRC, which suggests that there is an appetite for socialism in Scotland. The SSP, even at their peak, always looked a bit amateurish to me though.

 

I am sensing that you are of the left-wing persuasion yourself, Meister Jag. This is a very broad generalisation but I think Scotland, as a country tends, tends to lean more to the political left; hence the attachment to Labour (I know, I know - but I genuinely don't think people realised they were voting for diet Tories). To me then, it seems nonsensical to maintain a political union with a much larger neighbour in England, which tends (again, another very broad generalisation) to lean more to the political right, q.v the success of the Tories in the last general election.

 

sorry forgot to add before i got side tracked , why would the thousands of scottish armed forces vote for something that would make them jobless? no not all jobs would go BUT you wouldnt know if yours was safe.

Correct me if I am wrong but weren't Scottish infantry regiments subjected to cuts recently? If so, then remaining in the union won't necessarily guarantee anyone in the armed forces their job; it certainly didn't do Leuchars air base much good.

[Guy Incognito]

Totally agree, open a call centre and say we've cracked our unemployment problem! I'd love to hear the SNP saying that we've brought 'x' amount of manufacturing jobs to Scotland with 'x' amount of guaranteed apprenticeships. Sad thing is, it ain't going to happen and as you say education is all that's on offer... followed by service sector jobs if you can find them.

It certainly is unlikely to happen under the current economic set-up. The career choices for most young people in Scotland these days tend to be: public sector job; service sector job; crime; emigrate.

 

Serious point, if we ever gained independence then I'm sure what's left of the British armed forces would be more than happy to take Scottish recruits. Probably no problem with swearing allegiance to the Crown as we'd still be linked through the Commonwealth etc.

...or join the army get yourself blown to bits in an illegal foreign war.

[Woodstock Jag]

not if its paying for there pension and/or job seekers allowance and all the rest, we would also have to start our own training depots sort out our own logistics all cost money.

 

This is all bullcrap. You can't have it both ways. If Scotland decides to scale back its share of the armed forces that are severed from the UK, it would save money because operational costs would be reduced. We wouldn't "have to start our own training depots"; simply use the ones that are already there and decommission or lease out those we don't need for our own purposes. The money saved from that scaling down would go back into the real economy creating jobs. Even if someone's on the dole for an intervening period, that's less than they're being paid in the armed forces.

 

why put bases( and there are no operational reasons to)in scotland when you can create/enlarge garrisons which would add jobs and welth to those areas?

 

Because *they're already there* so don't have a high capital demand.

 

as i have said above due to having to train our own forces and supply them with the kit needed, even for a small defense force this would be expensive

 

But a lot less than we're paying at the moment towards an armed force that's got more tanks, copters, fighter-jets, aircraft carriers, servicemen, bullets and grenades per capita at the moment. Personally I don't see why an independent Scotland would need anything other than a token defence force. We'd be as well handing out spears to Teuchters.

 

and (at my level anyway) are not by a long chalk the most expensive

 

The military expenditure of the UK is absurd. Austria spends less than 1/3, Norway and Sweden both less than 1/2, Germany under half, Japan about 1/3, Belgium under 1/2, Finland about 1/2, New Zealand under 1/2, you get the picture, as a proportion of GDP compared with the UK on its military. Are you seriously suggesting that an independent Scotland would have anything like the need to make the existing level of commitment the current UK does? Frankly does the UK? The one big thing going for independence is the opportunity to trigger the substantial demilitarisation of parts, if not all, of the UK

 

do you really think that the voters in the remainder of the uk would be happy that they were paying for bases in scotland when there are bases/land sitting empty in there countries. there would be an uproar to say the least.

 

No, I think they'd probably be quite annoyed at wasting money on them. With any luck it would make them do a double-take and realise just how much money we piss up the wall sending troops into other countries without an international mandate.

 

i think that england would wash there hands of us and pull everything out of scotland just an opinion just as yours is

 

As I said though, even if they do, it just means there's even less cause to justify military expenditure in Scotland. It would then be cut completely and we could sit out the ridiculous arms race and focus our efforts on generating real wealth.

[jaggybunnet]

Serious point, if we ever gained independence then I'm sure what's left of the British armed forces would be more than happy to take Scottish recruits. Probably no problem with swearing allegiance to the Crown as we'd still be linked through the Commonwealth etc.

 

not really, they are over strength, we are not

 

Oh and in terms of navy bases; depending on what independence really means, wouldn't HM still own the coastline so would get to keep her nuclear bases. Have I missed something? I mean we're not exactly going to build a wall and all that.

 

does salmond frothing at the moth about nuclear bases in scotland not stop this or will the smell of the cash, ease the pain

would scotland keep/pay for its forces to stay in england, i don't think so and i don't think they will either.

[alx]

>>>> committed nationalists and unionists won't change their minds <<<<<

But I'm interested in factual points that people might be interested in. Only WJ has made the point about the massive defence underspend scam that's been foisted on Scotland. Most of the Navy, Army and RAF is actually based in the South East of England. It's a total shaft. This is the sort of information that will hopefully be made available for people afore the referendum. I don't know the accounts (I doubt many people do) but if we increased our defence spending substantially it would still be less than the money that is salted away by Whitehall. Surely Scottish armed forces personnel would be glad to be stationed a bit closer to home?

[jaggybunnet]

It is a shame for the far-left in Scotland that Sheridan's ego (and libido) essentially facilitated its implosion. In the first couple of Holyrood parliaments they won quite a few list seats, IIRC, which suggests that there is an appetite for socialism in Scotland. The SSP, even at their peak, always looked a bit amateurish to me though.

 

I am sensing that you are of the left-wing persuasion yourself, Meister Jag. This is a very broad generalisation but I think Scotland, as a country tends, tends to lean more to the political left; hence the attachment to Labour (I know, I know - but I genuinely don't think people realised they were voting for diet Tories). To me then, it seems nonsensical to maintain a political union with a much larger neighbour in England, which tends (again, another very broad generalisation) to lean more to the political right, q.v the success of the Tories in the last general election.

 

 

Correct me if I am wrong but weren't Scottish infantry regiments subjected to cuts recently? If so, then remaining in the union won't necessarily guarantee anyone in the armed forces their job; it certainly didn't do Leuchars air base much good.

 

 

the scottish regiments sometimes struggle to man the battalions, some of this is due to loss of identity with the unit name changes and amalgamations as for Leuchars it is to be taken over by army units with more not less troop staying there

[Mr Scruff]

I also tend to drink in the Glenleven and am occasionally to be found in there in the company of a wee bearded St Mirren fan of the far-left persuasion. We have a shared interest in music and some shared political views; although I stop short at planned show trials and executions for crimes against the working class! I mean, life's short enough...

 

You think I'm bad, spend some time in this wee guy's company... you may know who I'm on about? Rumour has it that he was once the Paisley Panda (St M mascot) and was lifted for throwing bars of soap at Morton fans. An urban myth as far as I'm concerned as he'd never have got into the outfit and used to chain smoke in those days. But when in court, rumour has it that when asked to explain his actions he said he was "at the cutting edge of football mascotry"! But one of the good guys and an old comrade.

Now that's funny right there. And my St Mirren supporting wife recognizes the description...

[jaggybunnet]

This is all bullcrap. You can't have it both ways. If Scotland decides to scale back its share of the armed forces that are severed from the UK, it would save money because operational costs would be reduced. We wouldn't "have to start our own training depots"; simply use the ones that are already there and decommission or lease out those we don't need for our own purposes. The money saved from that scaling down would go back into the real economy creating jobs. Even if someone's on the dole for an intervening period, that's less than they're being paid in the armed forces.

 

i know it is but we dont hold it against you there are no trainng depots in scotland , there are no logistics depots in scotland, they would have to be found and manned, that cost money mutiply that to include the different corps the navy and the airforce

 

 

Because *they're already there* so don't have a high capital demand.

 

apart from glencourse ALL camps in scotland need major investment, that is why they are selling some to build new camps

 

 

 

But a lot less than we're paying at the moment towards an armed force that's got more tanks, copters, fighter-jets, aircraft carriers, servicemen, bullets and grenades per capita at the moment. Personally I don't see why an independent Scotland would need anything other than a token defence force. We'd be as well handing out spears to Teuchters.

 

 

 

The military expenditure of the UK is absurd. Austria spends less than 1/3, Norway and Sweden both less than 1/2, Germany under half, Japan about 1/3, Belgium under 1/2, Finland about 1/2, New Zealand under 1/2, you get the picture, as a proportion of GDP compared with the UK on its military. Are you seriously suggesting that an independent Scotland would have anything like the need to make the existing level of commitment the current UK does? Frankly does the UK? The one big thing going for independence is the opportunity to trigger the substantial demilitarisation of parts, if not all, of the UK

 

you live in a dream world that there can be peace and no more wars, that world doesn't exist and if we weaken our armed forces we will really be in the shit. Brittan has always had a small peacetime regular army to weaken it further is an mad idea

No, I think they'd probably be quite annoyed at wasting money on them. With any luck it would make them do a double-take and realise just how much money we piss up the wall sending troops into other countries without an international mandate.

 

 

 

As I said though, even if they do, it just means there's even less cause to justify military expenditure in Scotland. It would then be cut completely and we could sit out the ridiculous arms race and focus our efforts on generating real wealth.

 

i don't have the education to put across properly in writing what i mean but just to say IMHO you are wrong and if we go along with what you propose at some time in the future we will suffer.

 

cant remember who said it but its true, the one thing we learn from history is that we never ever learn from history ( i am sure some smart arse will correct me though )

[jaggybunnet]

>>>> committed nationalists and unionists won't change their minds <<<<<

But I'm interested in factual points that people might be interested in. Only WJ has made the point about the massive defence underspend scam that's been foisted on Scotland. Most of the Navy, Army and RAF is actually based in the South East of England. It's a total shaft. This is the sort of information that will hopefully be made available for people afore the referendum. I don't know the accounts (I doubt many people do) but if we increased our defence spending substantially it would still be less than the money that is salted away by Whitehall. Surely Scottish armed forces personnel would be glad to be stationed a bit closer to home?

 

is it? the largest garrison in uk (catterick) might disagree. as would the major logistics bases in the midlands

 

not all the time, a home defense force that goes nowhere goes stale and is no use when the shit hits the fan.

[Woodstock Jag]

i know it is but we dont hold it against you there are no trainng depots in scotland , there are no logistics depots in scotland, they would have to be found and manned, that cost money mutiply that to include the different corps the navy and the airforce

 

Great. Save us all the hassle and abolish the armed forces completely on independence. Save us all the time and money.

 

apart from glencourse ALL camps in scotland need major investment, that is why they are selling some to build new camps

 

They only "need" major investment if you ascribe to the view that an independent Scotland should be as involved in international military activity as it is as a part of the UK. It shouldn't.

 

you live in a dream world that there can be peace and no more wars, that world doesn't exist and if we weaken our armed forces we will really be in the shit. Brittan has always had a small peacetime regular army to weaken it further is an mad idea

 

We don't have to take part. Whilst there's almost a circular argument for Britain, in having military resources, to use them... then requiring spending so we can use them.... there is no imperative for an independent Scotland to involve itself militarily with anywhere else in the world. Teuchters with pitchforks.

 

i don't have the education to put across properly in writing what i mean but just to say IMHO you are wrong and if we go along with what you propose at some time in the future we will suffer.

 

What, getting rid of most of our armed forces so we end up spending the same proportion of GDP as the economic giant Germany?

 

cant remember who said it but its true, the one thing we learn from history is that we never ever learn from history ( i am sure some smart arse will correct me though )

 

I prefer the words of a well known War leader... "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". History shows us that the military industrial complex actually drags countries into wars, and the relationship between war and the economy is ultimately a negative one.

[Collins Out!]

We'd do alright and less of our lads would die in the US oil grab. All this scaremongering is just nonsense.

[i@n]

I like to think of the words from one of the best songwriters this country has ever produced....

 

"War, war is stupid, and people are stupid"

 

Thank you Mr George O'Dowd

[Meister Jag]

JB's words of wisdom (couldn't work out how to respond keeping your quotes - must be an age thing!):

 

Serious point, if we ever gained independence then I'm sure what's left of the British armed forces would be more than happy to take Scottish recruits. Probably no problem with swearing allegiance to the Crown as we'd still be linked through the Commonwealth etc.

 

not really, they are over strength, we are not

 

Oh and in terms of navy bases; depending on what independence really means, wouldn't HM still own the coastline so would get to keep her nuclear bases. Have I missed something? I mean we're not exactly going to build a wall and all that.

 

does salmond frothing at the moth about nuclear bases in scotland not stop this or will the smell of the cash, ease the pain

would scotland keep/pay for its forces to stay in england, i don't think so and i don't think they will either.

 

Does Scotland not have quite a history of providing mercenaries, so I'm pretty sure that the English regiments would be happy to accept our brave lads into their ranks. (Probably pay them less like the Gurkhas!)

 

On your military bases in Scotland point, a deal would be done to keep them here for 'x' years and this would then become a political issue with whatever party was in opposition. And yes, money would be involved; but with the positive attachment of local jobs plus MOD money coming into local economies etc. But should we be taxing said employees as they'd be taping into the wonderful public services that would be available in a free and independent Scotland. (And the band played....)

 

Quick question: mention the military and you become all moist, are you a planning on becoming a military dictator or something? If so, tell me and I'll do a runner before you start sorting out your political opponents!

[Meister Jag]

I prefer the words of a well known War leader... "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". History shows us that the military industrial complex actually drags countries into wars, and the relationship between war and the economy is ultimately a negative one.

 

Good point and reinforced by the Marxist theory of war which argues that all war grows out of the class war. Most wars are imperial ventures to enhance the power of the ruling class and divide the proletariat of the world by pitting them against each other for contrived ideals such as nationalism, religion or to topple unstable dictators who happen to have something we want (usually oil). Some wars are a natural outgrowth of the free market and class system, and will not disappear until a world revolution occurs; but that won't ever happen as Marxists are usually too busy fighting with each other.

[Woodstock Jag]

Good point and reinforced by the Marxist theory of war which argues that all war grows out of the class war.

 

It doesn't tend to grow out of class divisions rather nationalistic ones. Class identity is even more artificial than concepts of nationhood and nationalism.