Just Say Yes

[Jaggernaut]

is that don't want to or cant?

 

Are you suggesting that some small independent countries should try to become a dependent region of a bigger neighbouring country?

Edited July 2, 2013 by Jaggernaut

[jaggybunnet]

Are you suggesting that some small independent countries should try to become a dependent region of a bigger neighbouring country?

 

I couldn't begin to give the answers to those questions, but indeed other countries have embraced independence and have dealt with those "problems". And not a single one has voted to go back to being dependent on another country.

 

not really, it was in answer to Guy Incognitos post above.

[twinny]

By missing out 2010 you have proved my point. A Conservative government with a healthy overall majority, i.e. over 50 seats, would be very different to the current Coalition.

 

 

I said it very rarely affects the outcome, and Scotland hasn't affected the outcome in 15 out of 18 previous general elections.

 

The 'anomaly' you describe is caused by the more sparse population in Scotland and Wales, which is perfectly reasonable.

[Jaggernaut]

I said it very rarely affects the outcome, and Scotland hasn't affected the outcome in 15 out of 18 previous general elections.

 

The 'anomaly' you describe is caused by the more sparse population in Scotland and Wales, which is perfectly reasonable.

 

In contrast to the "dense" populations in England and NI.

 

 

Good story a few years back when the New Zealand PM was talking about the large numbers of young Kiwis leaving to get work in Australia. He told his audience that there was no cause for concern, as this movement was improving the national IQs of both countries.

[Guy Incognito]

By missing out 2010 you have proved my point. A Conservative government with a healthy overall majority, i.e. over 50 seats, would be very different to the current Coalition.

 

Scotland and Wales, by having more seats per 100,000 voters than England, have a disproportionate influence on the outcome of general elections. All seats should have the same number of electors. The Conservatives tried to deal with that anomaly but were stuffed by the Lib Dems who reneged on the Coalition agreement.

 

BTW, it's a bit rich of the Lib Dems to oppose the EU referendum bill. Their 2010 manifesto included a pledge to hold an in/out referendum on EU membership. As usual, the lazy media journalists have failed to expose their hypocrisy.

 

But in real terms it has no effect, as recent history has shown. England's population is nearly 10 times that of Scotland and Wales' combined, so it is almost inevitable.

 

Or we could look at it from the other perspective: why should Scotland and Wales have a disproportionate say over affairs in England? Neither situation seems ideal to me.

 

not really, it was in answer to Guy Incognitos post above.

 

It was actually Jaggernaut who made that post.

 

In contrast to the "dense" populations in England and NI.

 

 

Good story a few years back when the New Zealand PM was talking about the large numbers of young Kiwis leaving to get work in Australia. He told his audience that there was no cause for concern, as this movement was improving the national IQs of both countries.

 

 

That was a bit naughty of him.

[The Jukebox Rebel]

Could learn a great deal about diplomacy and statesmanship from our First Minister IMO

[Norgethistle]

Could learn a great deal about egotism and showmanship from our First Minister IMO

[jaggybunnet]

 

It was actually Jaggernaut who made that post.

 

 

 

Old age doesn't come its self does it

[Lambies Lost Doo]

To be honest I was quite happy with a Conservative Liberal Democrat coalition in Westminster <ducks for cover>. Labour had been in power too long and played a (small) part in a big financial global meltdown. Always wanted to see a coaltion work so it would give people a greater say in government, that's what supporters of PR say is a bonus is it not? There is debt mountain and the "cuts" are actually small when you look at how much the government is still borrowing and spending. I always take a Bob Geldof approach of "show me the f*cking money" (I know he never really said this) when it comes to government and also the independence debate. Where does the money come from? No one has told me this.

[Guy Incognito]

Old age doesn't come its self does it

[Norgethistle]

Oh we'll definetly get an invite to NATO, the EU etc

 

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-nato-entry-not-automatic-1-2986882

 

Well there is the NATO one gone, next will come the EU, then Sterling, then the Monarchy, then border control etc etc etc

 

The whole "YES" campaign has been drawn up on assumptions and guess work, "Salmond believes this will happen" & "But we're Scotland" appears to be the logic behind it, we are a small nation and a very small fish in Europe, we have NO clout even against alot of the newer ex communist blocks, we are effictively a Morton Fc withdrawing from the Scottish league and believing we will get a place in the EPL and be on the board of the G20 clubs because of our great spirit and history.

[Jaggernaut]

Oh we'll definetly get an invite to NATO, the EU etc

 

http://www.scotsman....matic-1-2986882

 

Well there is the NATO one gone, next will come the EU, then Sterling, then the Monarchy, then border control etc etc etc

 

The whole "YES" campaign has been drawn up on assumptions and guess work, "Salmond believes this will happen" & "But we're Scotland" appears to be the logic behind it, we are a small nation and a very small fish in Europe, we have NO clout even against alot of the newer ex communist blocks, we are effictively a Morton Fc withdrawing from the Scottish league and believing we will get a place in the EPL and be on the board of the G20 clubs because of our great spirit and history.

Oh we'll definetly get an invite to NATO, the EU etc

 

http://www.scotsman....matic-1-2986882

 

Well there is the NATO one gone, next will come the EU, then Sterling, then the Monarchy, then border control etc etc etc

 

The whole "YES" campaign has been drawn up on assumptions and guess work, "Salmond believes this will happen" & "But we're Scotland" appears to be the logic behind it, we are a small nation and a very small fish in Europe, we have NO clout even against alot of the newer ex communist blocks, we are effictively a Morton Fc withdrawing from the Scottish league and believing we will get a place in the EPL and be on the board of the G20 clubs because of our great spirit and history.

 

That's the problem: too many people believing the hype that the UK still must have "clout", and that we need to be killing thousands of innocent people in foreign countries, worrying about the ex-commies, that we need to be in the "G20" etc. etc. So many of the countries that put the UK to shame in terms of quality (and probably equality) of life are precisely not doing those things. And I would place just about all my money one one thing: Scotland as an independent nation would be more than welcome in international organizations.

[Norgethistle]

That's the problem: too many people believing the hype that the UK still must have "clout", and that we need to be killing thousands of innocent people in foreign countries, worrying about the ex-commies, that we need to be in the "G20" etc. etc. So many of the countries that put the UK to shame in terms of quality (and probably equality) of life are precisely not doing those things. And I would place just about all my money one one thing: Scotland as an independent nation would be more than welcome in international organizations.

 

Any clout or influence the UK has, Scotland will have at best 10% of that, we have no credit history, no armed forces, no currency established, membership approved for nothing, we will be at the doors asking to get in, and accepting any criteria / conditions that are flung our way (% of oil revenue, greater control from Brussels, schengan, etc etc), NATO, EU, and UK will not need Scotland after independance but Scotland will need them, so they will set the conditions and we will need to fall in line

[Jaggernaut]

Any clout or influence the UK has, Scotland will have at best 10% of that, we have no credit history, no armed forces, no currency established, membership approved for nothing, we will be at the doors asking to get in, and accepting any criteria / conditions that are flung our way (% of oil revenue, greater control from Brussels, schengan, etc etc), NATO, EU, and UK will not need Scotland after independance but Scotland will need them, so they will set the conditions and we will need to fall in line

 

What breathtaking stupidity of all the other newly independent nations, not to stop their unthinkable error of gaining independence! No "clout or influence", no credit history, no armed forces, no currency established, membership approved for nothing, asking at doors to get in, accepting any criteria/condition, not "needed" by anyone..... Again, what utter folly of those countries to go ahead and become true, independent nations nonetheless!

 

Any yet you know what? Most of them are doing just fine. Not one of them wants to reverse their position by becoming dependent on their previous owners again. Not even Norway, whose benefits your appear to enjoy while telling us all that we shouldn't aspire to similar independence.

 

Seems a bit strange to me.

[P-R]

Regards NATO membership - thought there would be some tinkering with the amount of time Scotland would still need to host Trident to ensure membership.

 

The EU - The way things are going it looks like the UK will be heading out if the polls are to be believed. From previous stories about this I believe Westminster could ask the EU today the status of an independent Scotland's membership as the EU will not respond officially to anyone else. Guess it depends which lawyers you speak to on how this plays out.

[jaggybunnet]

What breathtaking stupidity of all the other newly independent nations, not to stop their unthinkable error of gaining independence! No "clout or influence", no credit history, no armed forces, no currency established, membership approved for nothing, asking at doors to get in, accepting any criteria/condition, not "needed" by anyone..... Again, what utter folly of those countries to go ahead and become true, independent nations nonetheless!

 

Any yet you know what? Most of them are doing just fine. Not one of them wants to reverse their position by becoming dependent on their previous owners again. Not even Norway, whose benefits your appear to enjoy while telling us all that we shouldn't aspire to similar independence.

 

Seems a bit strange to me.

 

said before, is that don't want to or cant, Yugoslavia for a start could not be reformed and some of them were not happy with independence.

[Jaggernaut]

said before, is that don't want to or cant, Yugoslavia for a start could not be reformed and some of them were not happy with independence.

 

You sound almost regretful that some proudly independent countries cannot be absorbed by bigger neighbours.

[jaggybunnet]

You sound almost regretful that some proudly independent countries cannot be absorbed by bigger neighbours.

 

you read what you want into that, its what the yes camp do best,.

 

i was answering your post, some of these countries don't have the choice to go back even if they wanted too, so doesn't really help your point does it?

[Jaggernaut]

you read what you want into that, its what the yes camp do best,.

 

i was answering your post, some of these countries don't have the choice to go back even if they wanted too, so doesn't really help your point does it?

 

You're making it sound as if by not being given the choice to be absorbed by another country that the people are being repressed. Do Brits have a choice of voting to be absorbed by Germany? If not, is that a regrettable state of affairs?

[jaggybunnet]

You're making it sound as if by not being given the choice to be absorbed by another country that the people are being repressed. Do Brits have a choice of voting to be absorbed by Germany? If not, is that a regrettable state of affairs?

 

no i am not, that is once again is all in your head and prob why you support the snp/yescamp

[Jaggernaut]

no i am not, that is once again is all in your head and prob why you support the snp/yescamp

 

What appears to be in your head is the notion that some countries would prefer to be governed by other countries, but that somehow "they can't". Otherwise why would you even mention it?

 

You came in (again) on my response to Norgethistle's bemoaning the fact that an independent Scotland might have to start off like most other recently independent countries, who are doing nicely. Don't you have a more substantial argument than simply throwing insults at the snp/yes camp/Alex Salmond?

[Norgethistle]

What appears to be in your head is the notion that some countries would prefer to be governed by other countries, but that somehow "they can't". Otherwise why would you even mention it?

 

You came in (again) on my response to Norgethistle's bemoaning the fact that an independent Scotland might have to start off like most other recently independent countries, who are doing nicely. Don't you have a more substantial argument than simply throwing insults at the snp/yes camp/Alex Salmond?

 

These recently independant countries were either eastern block and seriously poor with very low wages so investment came in, but they all ready had their own currency army passports etc, or broke up through wars and the UN & NATO set them up, and none of them jumped straight into the EU within a year, try at least a decade and some like Romania are still trying, they knew they had no god given right to be at the top table and have been working over time to get there, uncle Alex believes Scotland will break away one day and be there the next day. Alot of these countries are struggling with debt, corruption unemployment etc and if it wasn't for the rediculous low wages inward investment would not be there.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Norgethistle

[jaggybunnet]

What appears to be in your head is the notion that some countries would prefer to be governed by other countries, but that somehow "they can't". Otherwise why would you even mention it?

 

your post

 

Not one of them wants to reverse their position by becoming dependent on their previous owners again.

 

firstly, how can you know that? my point is that some, due to circumstances don't have the choice to go back even if the wanted to..it not that hard to take in

 

You came in (again) on my response to Norgethistle's y.bemoaning the fact that an independent Scotland might have to start off like most other recently independent countries, who are doing nicel Don't you have a more substantial argument than simply throwing insults at the snp/yes camp/Alex Salmond?

 

Norgethistle has said it far better than i could.

 

if that's what you class as an insult then i feel sorry for you..i just thought it was a fact

[Guy Incognito]

Oh we'll definetly get an invite to NATO, the EU etc

 

http://www.scotsman....matic-1-2986882

 

Well there is the NATO one gone, next will come the EU, then Sterling, then the Monarchy, then border control etc etc etc

The whole "YES" campaign has been drawn up on assumptions and guess work, "Salmond believes this will happen" & "But we're Scotland" appears to be the logic behind it, we are a small nation and a very small fish in Europe, we have NO clout even against alot of the newer ex communist blocks, we are effictively a Morton Fc withdrawing from the Scottish league and believing we will get a place in the EPL and be on the board of the G20 clubs because of our great spirit and history.

 

No more so than the No campaign. 'This might happen, 'that might happen', 'this could happen', 'warning', 'threat', 'fear'.

 

Doom and gloom.

 

I said it earlier in the thread and I will say it again: no one knows what the future will hold for an independent Scotland, but no one knows what the future will hold for a Scotland that remains part of the UK. What the No campaign need to do is highlight why Scotland is so much better off in the UK, something they have largely failed to do so far.

 

Incidentally, I am struggling to think of one story published by the Scotsman newspaper on the subject of independence that has been anything other than completely anti. I found this bit interesting though: And UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond warned that the United Kingdom could block Scotland’s membership if Holyrood refuses to allow the Trident nuclear deterrent to be based on the Clyde.

 

Now, call me paranoid but that sounds a wee bit like a threat. Or even blackmail. And you want Scotland to be in a union with these people?!

 

Any clout or influence the UK has, Scotland will have at best 10% of that, we have no credit history, no armed forces, no currency established, membership approved for nothing, we will be at the doors asking to get in, and accepting any criteria / conditions that are flung our way (% of oil revenue, greater control from Brussels, schengan, etc etc), NATO, EU, and UK will not need Scotland after independance but Scotland will need them, so they will set the conditions and we will need to fall in line

 

Do you honestly believe that the EU are going to turn away a country with Scotland's natural resources? They let places like Cyprus and Slovenia in! Why do you think they have been drooling over your adopted country like a plooky teenage boy who has just acquired his first jazz mag? And do you think the governments of the EU member state are going to leave tens of thousands of their own citizens effectively stranded for no good reason?

 

If we don't get into NATO, well, good. I don't want Scotland to be in NATO. It does make me wonder where that leaves Trident though. Personally, I would have thought a 'rogue state' equipped with nuclear missiles and submarines might make the members of NATO feel a teensy bit anxious. Surely it would be better to have them onside?

 

The UK most definitely would miss Scotland. The other month Dennis Healey all but admitted that the true value of Scotland's oil and gas reserves were kept under wraps back in the 1970s to thwart the 'threat' of Scottish independence, because the government could not afford to lose the revenues. http://www.holyrood....ising-eyebrows/

 

And guess what? Their predecssors don't feel they can either. Why else do you think David Cameron, whose party is a near irrelevance in Scotland, is campaigning so feverishly for a no vote? Why, when he could say 'toodle pip' to 59 constituencies mainly represented by Labour MPs, thus increasing the prospect of extended Tory rule even more? And why do you think former Chancellor and establishment man Alistair Darling would put his already tattered credibility on the line by appearing at the Scottish Tory conference to big up Better Together?

 

These recently independant countries were either eastern block and seriously poor with very low wages so investment came in, but they all ready had their own currency army passports etc, or broke up through wars and the UN & NATO set them up, and none of them jumped straight into the EU within a year, try at least a decade and some like Romania are still trying, they knew they had no god given right to be at the top table and have been working over time to get there, uncle Alex believes Scotland will break away one day and be there the next day. Alot of these countries are struggling with debt, corruption unemployment etc and if it wasn't for the rediculous low wages inward investment would not be there.

 

They didn't all have their own currency or army when they became independent. Latvia, for instance, did not have its own army, as it had been part of the Soviet Union. Slovakia did not have its own currency when they and they Czechs parted ways. I imagine they had to issue their own passports too. (How must they have managed?!)

 

Where Scotland differs from any accession country it that its citizens already are citizens of the EU and have been for decades. Plus there are tens of thousands (maybe more) of other EU citizens currently living in Scotland. I doubt 'Uncle Alex' expects us to be there the next day, since it is widely accepted that we would have to apply afresh. But it wouldn't make any practical sense for the EU to impede Scotland's application, if it were to come, let alone reject it altogether.

[Guy Incognito]

Regards NATO membership - thought there would be some tinkering with the amount of time Scotland would still need to host Trident to ensure membership.

 

The EU - The way things are going it looks like the UK will be heading out if the polls are to be believed. From previous stories about this I believe Westminster could ask the EU today the status of an independent Scotland's membership as the EU will not respond officially to anyone else. Guess it depends which lawyers you speak to on how this plays out.

 

The UK government could have it cleared up quite easily, but for obvious reasons they are not prepared to try. They are the same reasons why they have point-blank refused to enter into any kind of negotiations with the Scottish government prior to the referendum. The last thing Westminster want at this stage of the game is to allay any fears in the minds of Scots voters. Fear, along with apathy and confusion, is their biggest weapon.