Yeah, self-determination is great.
Alex Salmond and Independence
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Can you actually guard against terrorism these days? Where was the protection on 7/7 or at Glasgow Airport (still the most idiotic and worst planned attack I know of)? If people want to blow themselves up and kill hundreds of innocent people they will.
Not to be controversial but I don't think Scotland would be much of a target for terrorism if we weren't in the UK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
Ireland only spends around a billion euros a year to cover all that. Also Scotland are entitled to their share of equipment and personnel.
Last edited:
For the Scots on here, is the national media exaggerating the extent of nationalist bully boy tactics? Because some of the stuff I am reading sounds like it's from the Putin manual - harassment of opponents at meetings, intimidation, an army of spammers attacking any on line comment section....I am of course familiar with orchestrated media campaigns so can equally well accept that it's an exaggeration. But, still, it doesn't sound like typical electioneering in the UK.
Yes, there is a lot to do, looking at the BIB.
Absolutely no doubt about it, Salmond hasn't even scratched the surface of what an independent Scotland will need to take account of should the yes vote win.
He's so horribly out of his depth it's embarrassing. I've been following the independence debate for a while and a vote for yes just seems like the biggest gamble in history.
His attitude towards the potential currency is a good example. He simply doesn't know, he's guessing. It's getting to the point where people are asking questions of him, and he doesn't know the answer, or just wings it with an 'it will be ok' attitude.
The no campaign here don't have to justify their stance here because they are backed up by a stable Union of hundreds of years standing. The burden of persuasion lies with Salmond here and he's doing a terrible job. Hopefully Scotland will wake up tomorrow and realise it's too big a gamble after all.
And to any Scottish people on here, I and others are not trying to patronise as this is your decision entirely, it just seems to me if something isn't broken, why fix it?
He's so horribly out of his depth it's embarrassing. I've been following the independence debate for a while and a vote for yes just seems like the biggest gamble in history.
His attitude towards the potential currency is a good example. He simply doesn't know, he's guessing. It's getting to the point where people are asking questions of him, and he doesn't know the answer, or just wings it with an 'it will be ok' attitude.
The no campaign here don't have to justify their stance here because they are backed up by a stable Union of hundreds of years standing. The burden of persuasion lies with Salmond here and he's doing a terrible job. Hopefully Scotland will wake up tomorrow and realise it's too big a gamble after all.
And to any Scottish people on here, I and others are not trying to patronise as this is your decision entirely, it just seems to me if something isn't broken, why fix it?
Ireland isn't in NATO, if the Scots were to apply they'd need to spend 2% of their GDP on defence.
But the thing is, who is going to pay for the new ships, airforce and other things that any possible Scottish Armed Forces will need, surely that will be well over a Billion anyway.
There was a protest outside the BBC Studios in Glasgow and there have been reports of NO voters being verbally attacked.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29196912
The source of all the spending pledges seems to be oil and we know how economical with the truth Salmond has been on that so again it suggests strongly that the Scots are in for spending cuts and tax rises.
Defence is another major element of Scottish public spending that the UK government has control over. The Scottish government has said it would cut the defence budget to £2.5 billion – which the IFS has said is likely to represent about 1.6% of an independent Scotland’s GDP. The cut represents a reduction of around £400 million, from the £2.9 billion spending estimated in 2015-16 (the last full year Scotland would remain part of the UK if it votes for independence).
But the IFS has warned that it may have a knock on effect to potential NATO membership as there’s a required minimum spending supposedly mandated for it of 2% of GDP.
Scotland are entitled to their share of assets such as ships,airforce etc just as they are going to have to take on their share of the UK debt. Its has to work both ways.
Scotland will get a huge amount of foreign direct investment if it goes independent. They can cut corpo tax and as they have excellent University research facilities and an excellent track record of University departments working along side multi-national companies.
http://www.universities-scotland.ac...ail,0&cntnt01articleid=156&cntnt01returnid=23
It would be bad news for us here in Ireland. Our Universities lag behind in working along side multinationals in R and D.
If the question on the referendum tomorrow was "is it broken?", it'd be a landslide I reckon.
But Salmond says he isn't taking Scotlands share so how does that work out ?
True. At a cost.
The White Paper, produced by the Holyrood administration, says it would have an annual defence budget of £2.5bn and at the point of independence it would have a land force of 3,500 troops and 1,200 reservists.
As well as artillery, engineering and medical capabilities, it would also include an aviation unit with six helicopters.
The maritime forces would include two frigates from the Royal Navy's current fleet, four mine counter measure vessels and two offshore patrol vessels.
It would also have other patrol boats and support ships and it would need 2,000 personnel and 200 reservists.
For the air force, it would have a quick reaction alert squadron of 12 Typhoon jets; a tactical transport squadron of six Hercules aircraft and a helicopter squadron. That section of the defence set up would need 2,000 personnel and 300 reservists.
The aim would be to have a total force of 15,000 personnel with 5,000 reservists across the three services after 10 years of independence.
It depends on how much of the debt they take, one way or the other they will still be paying for it.
They'll need it as there are so many gaps to plug....£400m in the NHS to start with!
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/09/17/independence-for-scotland-it-my-heart-vs-my-head/
This probably says a lot about what many people think of the split.
This probably says a lot about what many people think of the split.
Ireland, as has already been stated, is not or want to be a NATO country, so that analogy doesn't fit.
You say Scotland is entitled to their fair share, but what you are entitled to doesn't come into it with regards to the military. Like it or not Scotland, should it vote to leave the Union, will get nothing equipment or personnel wise fact. So as we are now back to my previous question how will an independant Scotland fund creating an military from scratch?
Its a bluff. Scotland needs the currency Union and the rest of the UK needs Scotland to take on its share of the debt.
Maybe the Scots will be happy to be out of NATO?
http://www.yesscotland.net/news/key-answers-blueprint-independent-scotland
So basically what Yes Scotland are saying is wishful thinking regarding defence. Okay thanks.
Forget the poll, Scottish independence should be decided in a one off game between Celtic and Rangers...
How do you think Ireland ever got an army? The Brits left us with a load of expertise.
Paradoxically the British soldiers were generally liked and many stayed after the war of independence.
Last edited:
If it is No, will Gordon Brown be credited for turning it around?
We can debate the economics of it all till the cows come home but at the end of the day its clear there is a considerable risk that Scotland will be worse off economically. It could also be better off but if the Scottish people really want independence its then these are the risks they have to take.
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2014/03/letter-belfast-support-irish-unity-all-time-low
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2014/03/letter-belfast-support-irish-unity-all-time-low
We should have a Red Cafe Poll on this. Will it or won't it pass?
No has always been in the lead, except for one rogue poll, from day 1 so if it stays like that it'll have had very little to do with Broon.
Ireland in 1922 was an entirely different beast to Scotland in 2014, Ireland was a 3rd world country in the midst of a civil war.
That would be a no-contest at the moment...
Of more interest to me will be what happens if it's a very narrow win for No. The current thuggish behaviour of the hard-line Yes activists (not the normal fair-minded majority it has to be said) will be nothing to what will happen if they see their wishes and dreams dashed by a small margin. Be prepared for some pretty nasty stuff from them.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/17/latest-scottish-independence-poll-ipsos-mori
So in the final polls, four (Panelbase, ICM, Opinium, Survation) have it at 52% to 48% in favour of No, and Ipsos Mori have it at 51% to 49%.
All with undecideds excluded, which begs the question who the hell is undecided a day before the vote?
So in the final polls, four (Panelbase, ICM, Opinium, Survation) have it at 52% to 48% in favour of No, and Ipsos Mori have it at 51% to 49%.
All with undecideds excluded, which begs the question who the hell is undecided a day before the vote?
I have a fear that a small 'no' victory could lead to trouble in the streets. I just can't see how a tight victory is going to pass off peacefully.
Hopefully who ever wins, wins by a large margin.
Ireland wasn't a poor country. It was how the wealth was distributed that was the problem.
We tend to think of Ireland as being historically a poor country, but at independence it was no poorer than most other countries in Europe. Indeed in 1938, annual income per person in Ireland was estimated $252, the ninth highest in Europe, behind the UK, Germany and the Scandinavians but ahead of such countries as France, Austria and Italy.[11]
At independence income per capita in Ireland was ahead of such countries as France, Austria and Italy. In the 1950s Ireland fell well behind.
Certainly wealth was not evenly divided and most people faced hard times in the 1920s and 1930s. In 1932, 1% of the Irish population owned 59% of its wealth, while 8% owned 34% and another 10% owned 37%. The remaining 81% had no taxable assets, or bluntly, had no disposable income above subsistence level[12]. Some 75,000 people emigrated, mostly to the UK, every year in the late 1930s.
http://www.theirishstory.com/2011/0...rowing-and-debt-in-independent-ireland/#_edn8
The bit in red is the most important bit. There was wealth in the form of Aristocrats and Landlords but that skewed the true figure. France, Austria and Italy were also hit hard by the Great War. The fact is, Ireland is not a tangable comparison. Comparing a country bordering on third world, in the midst of 4 years of constant war, leaving the Empire at it's peak is completely different from Scotland leaving in 2014.
Perhaps not all undecided, perhaps just not willing to express their voting intentions. I think there will be far less undecided come tomorrow.
If you have been watching Celtic then it would be a whopping success for the No campaign then.
Dismantled
who are you, his PR man? if you mean shouted louder and still couldn't name any exact policies, talk about scaremongering in response to everything to escape he has no policies, that was more accurate. What was it he said when asked about the currency, "oh we have four options Alistair", yes Alec why don't you actually choose one and recommend something concrete to the Scottish people. Both debates were shambolically moderated, in fact there was very little moderation at all. Its all very nasty politics, no people getting abuse on twitter, shopowners who declare no having their property damaged to name but a few. Disgraceful.Even in the latest NHS budget stuff, where NHS managers are pointing out holes in the SNP's statements, he still cannot come to answer any questions on it and just hides behind that its 'scaremongering' and 'has Westminster all over it' blah blah blah. He moans about the Bedroom Tax yet only 2 out of 6 SNP Members who are MPs could be bothered to turn up in the recent vote.
I have to affiliation for the Better Together team, I don't see why English taxpayers are having to fund Scottish pledges for more powers when areas such as the north of England have been requesting more power for ages and have only got micro management policies from that shit, Eric Pickles. The Better Together have their own selfish issues, Cameron is worried about being the 'Prime Minster who lost Scotland', Labour are worrying about losing 40 MPs in Scotland and taking a big dent in their General Election prospects.
With regard to earlier polls, the media coverages has increased tenfold in recent weeks. Their was little media coverage previously. Ever since both debates and various statements in the media by celebrities and other people and nearing the poll, coverage is everywhere. This has been reflected in the number of people registering to vote. National pride is what Salmond is hiding behind but has little or no policies. Scotland can be successful if they want to and the thought of independence is spurring people on but with Salmond in charge, he will lead them down a dark hole.
Seems perfectly reasonable this to me, alot of conflicting information, and too many ifs, and buts, it is perfectly fair in thinking many people just don't know what to do.
Richard Branson's idea was the best, in that they get more powers now, and see how it goes, this in the understanding that the separation vote will be revisited in 10 years time.
Yeah seems a bit crazy. What sort of information are these people going to get in the next 24 hours that will suddenly convince them to say or leave.
I image if your still undecided now it's properly not worth voting(There's actually nothing wrong in not voting)
Can't see the British government agreeing to that. Would also create a weird dynamic where it would be in the rest of the UK's best interests that it not go well for Scotland.