I'm sure some didn't. I'm equally sure a lot did.
Alex Salmond: A second Scottish referendum is inevitible
- Thread starter Hades
- Start date
- Status
I'm sure some didn't. I'm equally sure a lot did.
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,491
- Location
- Scotland
The English will get a taste of this overt propaganda come the EU referendum.
I'm sure some did. I'm equally sure a lot didn't.
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,491
- Location
- Scotland
This tired argument. We have accepted it.
Some have not... And I agree its tired argument.
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,491
- Location
- Scotland
The only people who haven't accepted it are people claiming that the results were rigged (not including the propaganda). Those people are a tiny minority. The vast majority of YES voters have accepted the result.
Thats very true. As much as I dont like the current government I am not so sure about Scotland on its own now.
That simply isn't true!
The SNP had a 650 page guide on their vision for an Independent Scotland. If people took the time to read it they might have found answers. Of course the majority of people aren't going to do that.
People are self interested. It is easier to argue 'if you don't want to risk changing your life for the worse vote NO.' It also helps when you have universal support from the entire MSM, BBC, and even the civil service. Not to mention multi national corporations threatening workers with job loses if we become Independent.
That is the real reason NO won. People are self interested.
People voted no because of what could happen. They didn't want to lose their jobs, pensions, eu citizenship, even their currency. That's not an attack, it's just what happened.
Sorry, I forgot mentioning anything negative about independence is bullying.
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,491
- Location
- Scotland
That is not what you were saying a minute ago. You were arguing that the SNP didn't have any answers. Now you have just copied my argument and are trying to use it against me somehow! Weird!
Who said anything about bullying?
The amount of anti Scottish sentiment in this thread saddens me
I'm glad that No won even though, had I still lived there, the rebel in me would have been tempted to vote Yes
I think a point lost on a lot of people is that the SNP won a landslide in the general election that even a Military Junta would be proud of
This was a direct result of what happened during the Independence campaign and, arguably, gives the SNP a mandate for Independence irrespective of when the last 'once in a generation' event was
I'm glad that No won even though, had I still lived there, the rebel in me would have been tempted to vote Yes
I think a point lost on a lot of people is that the SNP won a landslide in the general election that even a Military Junta would be proud of
This was a direct result of what happened during the Independence campaign and, arguably, gives the SNP a mandate for Independence irrespective of when the last 'once in a generation' event was
Since when did we start hating Scottish people!!! 
I love scots, irish, welsh etc Well maybe not the latter so much being a scouser and all.
But Scottish people are great had many a banter and a good drink with them, same as the Irish. Welsh well a little banter but its usually unpleasant and ends in a fight!
I love scots, irish, welsh etc Well maybe not the latter so much being a scouser and all.
But Scottish people are great had many a banter and a good drink with them, same as the Irish. Welsh well a little banter but its usually unpleasant and ends in a fight!
I don't think they have a mandate for another referendum at all. There was a referendum, and their side lost it by 10 points. They did win a landslide in the General Election, winning all but 3 seats, however, they still only had a little over half the votes cast. Meaning that a little under half of the Scottish electorate didn't vote for them. And this on a manifesto not including another referendum.
Personally, I think there should be a line drawn under the whole situation, and call it a day for a generation, as was the SNP's position anyway, at least while they thought they would win. A generation, to me at least, being roughly 4 parliaments, enough time for someone not born yet to start drinking.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 895
- Location
- Sydney
Why do you think the UK government consistently refuses to do this?
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 895
- Location
- Sydney
We already fund our own health service and we pay our share per head for the armed forces and have a diminishing footprint of bases and personnel in Scotland.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 895
- Location
- Sydney
A sample study is by definition a sample, its not capable of defining an entire population.
On what basis should it be restricted to Scottish born only? Why shouldn't people who live and work here but have the temerity to be born elsewhere not be able to have a say about the future of their current "home" country?
Perhaps we should also restrict it toblondegingerwhitefreckly people only too? Sound familiar?
How do you feel about EU citizens living in the UK being barred from voting on the EU referendum?
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 895
- Location
- Sydney
Being told you should die simply for holding a different political view feels very much like hatred.
You mean company warns that costs in a smaller market could be more than in larger market shocker!
It's already going that way with some things thanks to powers the Scottish parliament has meaning some offers can't be done in Scotland.
Now consider what might happen to the overheads if Scotland were independent and had it's own rules for things like food standards and imports (which would likely include imports from the rest of the UK).
It doesn't take much of a change to affect the overheads and thus end user costs.
And that is something that would be repeated in thousands of areas, but the Yes campaign kept denying "why of course you could still pass from the RUK to Scotland and back without a passport, even if our borders and immigration policy varied from the rest of the UK"*, and "why of course we can keep using the pound with no issues" (whilst practically every economist and lay person who understands why it's important to have what controls you can over your currency were shaking their heads).
The big problem for the Yes campaign is and was fairly simple.
They had to show how things would improve, and that they had viable fall back plans for if things didn't meet their best estimates, or if people whose co-operation they would require to do things didn't want to.
Instead all they had was "you're scaremongering" and "don't be silly" or "they can't stop us".
All the no campaign had to do was say "do you like this at the moment" and offer minor changes that could be done relatively easily.
I have no issues with Scotland being independent (although I think we are better as a united country), but was getting thoroughly sick of the Nationalists, and could spot a lot of holes in the some parts of the Yes campaigns answers quite easily, with little things like "of course we'll still get our favourite programmes, and we'll be able to have more home grown stuff, but it won't cost anything more" an argument that has three instant potential failings.
One: the rights would have to be sorted out, it would not be automatic and potentially could cost a lot more (FTA stuff ending up on Sky because they bid more for it).
Two: More homegrown stuff would require more local industry and more money.
Three: See the second part of both previous problems (the "it won't cost more" argument tends to ignore the costs of buying the content in & making more) .
*A look at how we're part of the EU yet have different immigration policies and border controls suggest how wrong that was.
It would be interesting (and probably quite sad) to see what affect it had on the Scottish economy without the big bases, such as the trident one.
Thousands of armed forces personal, thousands more support jobs many of them being highly skilled no longer in place.
In countries like the U.S. the loss of such big bases has tended to devastate local economies, because they've often ended up relying on the money from supporting the bases via various services and products.
If the SNP and the Yes campaign were to win, as one of their pledges is to get rid of Trident from Scotland those jobs would presumably all go.
But it would mean no more Trident in Scotland, and I'm sure that it wouldn't really hurt the local at all, as the Yes Campaign would have thought of it.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 895
- Location
- Sydney
That has already happened since the number of RAF bases in Scotland has been cut from 3 to just 1 in favour of maintaining bases in England. We also have no conventional naval facilities protecting our 10,000km coastline any more. Coastguard and search and rescue services are also being stripped back. Service personnel based in Scotland have been cut by 35% since the year 2000 compared to a cut of 20% UK wide. Do you think Scotland is getting good value for money there?
And on your specific example of Faslane, the Scottish government have not once proposed closing the base in the event of independence. Instead it would become the HQ of the Scottish armed services which would actually create MORE jobs in the local area. There are only around 500 civilian jobs directly linked to the trident system.
Last edited:
- Status