Independent Scottish Air Force
Discussion
trashbat said:
I don't think you do understand.
I'm not Scottish and I hope the vote is No, but the reason I hope it's No is a selfish one. I see the result of No, Devo Max, as being a catalyst for something like federal-style reform in England, and I see Scottish independence as being the effective end of the same.
But if I were Scottish, I would vote Yes.
It's not quite taxation-without-representation, but when you're stuck with a minority share and Westminster doesn't represent you in any meaningful way, not even giving a f
k about the referendum until about two weeks ago when it dawned on them it might not go their way, then why wouldn't you vote for increased self-determination?
This thread is rabbiting on about things like Trident or the Eurofighter on the assumption that anyone cares. You give the Scots a referendum on Trident and see what happens, or ask about the military strategy that supposedly justifies it. For that matter, since security's the topic, why don't you ask if it was a good idea to chop up Nimrod? And even if they did have a say, at best you require significant support from the English to get what you want. The responses to the thread are illuminating - if not self-important Englishness from people that barely have any idea about what makes up their highly prized union, then it'll-never-work smugness.
I'm from the North of England and feel similarly disenfranchised from British political trends, something that appears to be largely concerned with bankers and landlords in London and the South East. I'm supposed to what, shut up and be grateful for some half arsed act of benevolence like moving a bit of the BBC? Union my arse. Unfortunately I don't have the same degree of coherent regional identity that would help push for reform. Fair play to the Scots for using theirs.
The whole of everybody in every western country feels that government doesn't look out for them. It's no big surprise that Scots feel that way. But all they will do is swap one bunch of people they don't feel care. For another bunch of people they don't feel care just because the second lot are closer. Scottish politicians are not some super breed who'll get it right all the time every time. They will screw up as much as the existing setup. Just on a smaller scale with less safety net. Good news is they have published how they plan to screw up and it looks worse for Scots than the existing lots plans. Scots want to rule their own destiny. So does everybody. Democracy doesn't work like that though.I'm not Scottish and I hope the vote is No, but the reason I hope it's No is a selfish one. I see the result of No, Devo Max, as being a catalyst for something like federal-style reform in England, and I see Scottish independence as being the effective end of the same.
But if I were Scottish, I would vote Yes.
It's not quite taxation-without-representation, but when you're stuck with a minority share and Westminster doesn't represent you in any meaningful way, not even giving a f
k about the referendum until about two weeks ago when it dawned on them it might not go their way, then why wouldn't you vote for increased self-determination?This thread is rabbiting on about things like Trident or the Eurofighter on the assumption that anyone cares. You give the Scots a referendum on Trident and see what happens, or ask about the military strategy that supposedly justifies it. For that matter, since security's the topic, why don't you ask if it was a good idea to chop up Nimrod? And even if they did have a say, at best you require significant support from the English to get what you want. The responses to the thread are illuminating - if not self-important Englishness from people that barely have any idea about what makes up their highly prized union, then it'll-never-work smugness.
I'm from the North of England and feel similarly disenfranchised from British political trends, something that appears to be largely concerned with bankers and landlords in London and the South East. I'm supposed to what, shut up and be grateful for some half arsed act of benevolence like moving a bit of the BBC? Union my arse. Unfortunately I don't have the same degree of coherent regional identity that would help push for reform. Fair play to the Scots for using theirs.
Speculatore said:
Junior Bianno said:
Remember a massive chunk of the Scottish population didn't ask for, or want, this vote.
That's not what the polls say.... The turn out will be interesting by percentage, as will the actual 'Yes' 'No' split.We will see at about 22:10 this evening who wanted it.......
3 years later after a heroic marketing effort, and some spectacularly optimistic promises of wealth, social justice and an egalitarian utopia, the country seems roughly split down the middle. As you say, we'll see tonight/tomorrow.
Whatever - we're screwed. The country is hopelessly divided. When Norway separated from Sweden 100 years ago, the percentage for "Yes" was 99.9% (184 votes against in fact
) That's how you split a country. This is just going to be a mess either way.Munter said:
The whole of everybody in every western country feels that government doesn't look out for them. It's no big surprise that Scots feel that way. But all they will do is swap one bunch of people they don't feel care. For another bunch of people they don't feel care just because the second lot are closer. Scottish politicians are not some super breed who'll get it right all the time every time. They will screw up as much as the existing setup. Just on a smaller scale with less safety net. Good news is they have published how they plan to screw up and it looks worse for Scots than the existing lots plans. Scots want to rule their own destiny. So does everybody. Democracy doesn't work like that though.
It certainly looks like that is how democracy works, what with the small matter of them voting on it right now.There's something to be said for being part of a wider union and there's something to be said for local decision making. What the right balance is is subjective but usually heavily depends on your relationship and commonality with the increasingly wider world. For many Scots the political commonality runs out fairly quickly once over the border.
With your line of reasoning, I take it you have no view on, say, the EU? After all it's just swapping one bunch of people for another.
How exactly has westminster not looked out for scottish intrests when westminster was effectively run for the last 13 years due to scottish socialist MPs? This is nonsense. And if that is the major issue, then the scottish labour MPs should be the ones you need to cane for conning the scots. Dont blame the English for this.
Ayahuasca said:
I wonder what will happen to the Army - apparently Salmond has said that all Scottish regiments would be maintained in the new Scottish defence force, so no more Scots Guards at Buck Palace etc, but how would he stop individual Scots Guardsmen putting in for a transfer to the British Army? After all the Jock soldiers didn't sign up to guard the fish dock at Aberdeen.
How many Scottish Typhoon pilots would choose to serve in the SAF? Has anyone asked them? How many Scottish Typhoon pilots are there anyway?
He can say what he wants, the lads swore to the British Army and HM! From speaking to the lads they won't be transferring.How many Scottish Typhoon pilots would choose to serve in the SAF? Has anyone asked them? How many Scottish Typhoon pilots are there anyway?
Also irritating is why our alleged leaders are robustly telling them that they won't be going - stop appeasing and capitulating ffs!
trashbat said:
t certainly looks like that is how democracy works, what with the small matter of them voting on it right now.
There's something to be said for being part of a wider union and there's something to be said for local decision making. What the right balance is is subjective but usually heavily depends on your relationship and commonality with the increasingly wider world. For many Scots the political commonality runs out fairly quickly once over the border.
With your line of reasoning, I take it you have no view on, say, the EU? After all it's just swapping one bunch of people for another.
You don't get what you want. You get the leaders the majority vote for. Who may or may not be who you voted for and may or may not do what you want. What you don't get is what YOU want. You don't make that decision.There's something to be said for being part of a wider union and there's something to be said for local decision making. What the right balance is is subjective but usually heavily depends on your relationship and commonality with the increasingly wider world. For many Scots the political commonality runs out fairly quickly once over the border.
With your line of reasoning, I take it you have no view on, say, the EU? After all it's just swapping one bunch of people for another.
We can see if they vote yes they will not get what they want from voting yes. So I'm suggesting they shouldn't vote yes. And you don't think that's a good idea?
Munter said:
You don't get what you want. You get the leaders the majority vote for. Who may or may not be who you voted for and may or may not do what you want. What you don't get is what YOU want. You don't make that decision.
We can see if they vote yes they will not get what they want from voting yes. So I'm suggesting they shouldn't vote yes. And you don't think that's a good idea?
If what you want doesn't match the majority, then you can be ignored, change your own view or redefine the demographic such that enough like-minded people form the majority - one enormous gerrymander.We can see if they vote yes they will not get what they want from voting yes. So I'm suggesting they shouldn't vote yes. And you don't think that's a good idea?
I think that if the average Scot feels that national self-determination beats the benefits of being in a union, then they should go for it. Very few beyond cheap talk on websites are seriously arguing that independence isn't actually workable within reasonable parameters. The question is only whether they want it.
When you say, 'they will not get what they want', what do you think that is? As far as I can tell it's got little to do with the SNP, or Salmond, and only so much to do with the contemporary Westminster parties.
I have no idea about your politics but I'm surprised to see such scorn on a forum so thoroughly popular with UKIP supporters. I don't agree with that either but it's the same principle: that power should be recalled home at the expense of our membership of something broader.
trashbat said:
I think that if the average Scot feels that national self-determination beats the benefits of being in a union, then they should go for it. Very few beyond cheap talk on websites are seriously arguing that independence isn't actually workable within reasonable parameters. The question is only whether they want it.
I want a million pounds to appear in the kitchen.Want is nothing. If the benefits were greater than the union I'd be telling them to go for it. But what's been laid out by the Yes campaign is worse. So I'm suggesting they are better off voting no.
Many yes people are voting for a nation free of debt, with all the oil in the north sea, in a currency union, with a fully funded NHS, defense forces, in the EU, early retirement, increased old age care, more jobs, and anything else they can dream up the oil paying for. That IS what many say they are voting for. And they are not going to get it.
Taita said:
Ayahuasca said:
I wonder what will happen to the Army - apparently Salmond has said that all Scottish regiments would be maintained in the new Scottish defence force, so no more Scots Guards at Buck Palace etc, but how would he stop individual Scots Guardsmen putting in for a transfer to the British Army? After all the Jock soldiers didn't sign up to guard the fish dock at Aberdeen.
How many Scottish Typhoon pilots would choose to serve in the SAF? Has anyone asked them? How many Scottish Typhoon pilots are there anyway?
He can say what he wants, the lads swore to the British Army and HM! From speaking to the lads they won't be transferring.How many Scottish Typhoon pilots would choose to serve in the SAF? Has anyone asked them? How many Scottish Typhoon pilots are there anyway?
Thing is, unless they're registered to vote in Scotland, they won't have voted in the referendum. All seems a bit odd to me.
Added to that, it's not entirely clear who exactly is "giving" them this option since, if it goes Yes, anyone serving in the UK forces, regardless of nationality, belongs to the UK MoD over which the new Scotland will have no control.
It's like they haven't thought it through at all and just keep saying what they'd like to happen in the hope it becomes fact.
I mean this idea of "claiming" squadrons, ships and personnel....... really? What if the new, reduced UK just "claims" them all back again?
Munter said:
I want a million pounds to appear in the kitchen.
Want is nothing. If the benefits were greater than the union I'd be telling them to go for it. But what's been laid out by the Yes campaign is worse. So I'm suggesting they are better off voting no.
Many yes people are voting for a nation free of debt, with all the oil in the north sea, in a currency union, with a fully funded NHS, defense forces, in the EU, early retirement, increased old age care, more jobs, and anything else they can dream up the oil paying for. That IS what many say they are voting for. And they are not going to get it.
Who are these people? Can you point to an example anywhere? Most I've seen on either side know what they're doing. Some of your claims (e.g. no debt) aren't even made by the Yes campaign.Want is nothing. If the benefits were greater than the union I'd be telling them to go for it. But what's been laid out by the Yes campaign is worse. So I'm suggesting they are better off voting no.
Many yes people are voting for a nation free of debt, with all the oil in the north sea, in a currency union, with a fully funded NHS, defense forces, in the EU, early retirement, increased old age care, more jobs, and anything else they can dream up the oil paying for. That IS what many say they are voting for. And they are not going to get it.
trashbat said:
ho are these people? Can you point to an example anywhere? Most I've seen on either side know what they're doing. Some of your claims (e.g. no debt) aren't even made by the Yes campaign.
No Salmond would never say that...oh hang on: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...Then supporters posted dross like this:
IndependentScot @IndependentScot Apr 14
Scotland cannot default on debt that it didn't issue. Didn't Ireland start fresh without taking on UK debt?
Many Yes voters believe they will be debt free, and richer than the rest of the UK if Yes wins. That's because Salmond has said so. And that's how they are going to fund all the shiny planes among other things.
Craigwww said:
It's sentiments like these that have convinced me to vote 'Yes'.
Sweeping, derogatory remarks by the 'know it all' English. Very little of what I have just read from you lot actually is anywhere near to the truth and demonstrates no more than a cursory glance at a local tabloid. This is a friendly forum for like minded people, predominantly British, so people should remember who they are insulting when talking bad of their neighboring country.
Cameron promotes 'better together' and 'a happy prosperous union' while the majority of the English public seem to view Scotland as somewhat of a joke who couldn't run their own country even if it is a Yes vote.
It's sad to have so little faith in a country which has given so much to the world, contributed so much to the UK economy, fought and died as part of the Uk in numerous wars and all under a government it usually didn't want or vote for.
Can you not see the irony in bold there? Get a grip. The Scottish dish out just as many insults to the English as the English give back. Sweeping, derogatory remarks by the 'know it all' English. Very little of what I have just read from you lot actually is anywhere near to the truth and demonstrates no more than a cursory glance at a local tabloid. This is a friendly forum for like minded people, predominantly British, so people should remember who they are insulting when talking bad of their neighboring country.
Cameron promotes 'better together' and 'a happy prosperous union' while the majority of the English public seem to view Scotland as somewhat of a joke who couldn't run their own country even if it is a Yes vote.
It's sad to have so little faith in a country which has given so much to the world, contributed so much to the UK economy, fought and died as part of the Uk in numerous wars and all under a government it usually didn't want or vote for.
If you notice most of the people here want Scotland to stay in. Surely that speaks volumes? As for a Government that it didn't want or vote for? Join the club. Politics these days is about voting for the best of a bad bunch.
I love that everyone seems to think that if like myself you live in the south east close to London we all drive around in supercars and live in massive houses. ha!
jmorgan said:
Max_Torque said:
Who exactly is going to invade Scotland?? The weathers terrible!!
Think of the oil, the US will find a reason, cruelty to haggis or something.Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff