[Sixstrings]

Ok my last spam on this.

This is hillarious!

Why Cameron's Scared Of Scottish Divorce: Russell Brand
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7VNQih51T0

Brand *almost* converts me, but..

What makes him think a Scottish national government would be some lefty paradise that's perfect and not corrupt? It would be the same sh*t, if anything smaller places are even more corrupt. Big fish in little ponds.

Also, maybe you can have a perfect little Scottish utopia, and Estonia is nice too, and Iceland, but -- a Europe of little places like that can't stand up or defend themselves, against anyone. Russia or ISIL or anybody.

UK is a darn pillar of NATO, can't just break that up.

So you see Brand's ideas don't hold -- you can have your little transition town peacenik places but they can't defend themselves. And the utopias always wind up corrupt too anyway, so there is no difference.

Brand, and I guess nationalist Scots, are just assuming someone else would be defending them. If the UK balkanizes and splits all up maybe Wales gone too eventually then who will that be defending them, the USA?

We kind of need the UK's help you know, Europe is pretty weak as it is with little places that are lefty with no militaries.

And I guess here a Russell Brand would say that Putin isn't anything to worry about, and there are no threats, well ask an Estonian or Ukrainian about that. But I don't guess Russel Brand cares about them, does he?

[Withnail]

Anyhow -- if the vote is yes, then it's just going to cost a bunch of money to set up some new bureaucrats in Scotland and make new flags and all that, and border controls, maybe man Hadrian's Wall again, and more bureaucracy, on and on.

Yes, man Hadrian's Wall again, outstanding idea.

I hate to pour cold water on the plan, but Hadrian's Wall is:

1) About 2,000 years old

2) For the most part not standing, it has been used as a quarry since being abandoned by the Romans in the 4th Century AD

3) Located entirely in England, indeed it runs through the middle of a major English city, Newcastle upon Tyne, 68 miles south of the current border.

4) A World Heritage site, so can't be altered or rebuilt.

[Withnail]

Hm, CNN raises the question -- will Britain be giving Scotland nuclear weapons?

That could be dangerous. A new, small nationalist nation just getting started and organized and they're going to have nuclear weapons?

US is against nuclear proliferation of any kind. You just don't want an accident to happen, you know?

A tiny amount of research would have informed you that the SNP's programme is for a nuclear weapon free Scotland.

They will close the British nuclear weapons base on the Clyde.

Nor would Scotland inherit any UK forces equipment which happened to be on their territory after a Yes vote.

It doesn't work in such a simplistic way.

[Tanada]

Six just because nobody responds to your flood technique of posting does not mean everyone agrees with you. Myself I will read one of your posts but if the next post is yours I scroll past the repetition and I keep doing it until I get to a different poster. You can post any way you wish as long as you do not SPAM or abuse other members, but volume does not equal quality, nor does repetition equal a convincing argument for your viewpoint.

Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Republicans and Democrats all hope Scots vote no:

Barack Obama tells Scotland: stay united

The unusual last-minute intervention by the President is a sign of concern in Washington that one of America's closest allies could be about to split in two.

"The UK is an extraordinary partner for America and a force for good in an unstable world. I hope it remains strong, robust and united," Mr Obama said in a tweet.

Mr Obama first expressed his support for the union in June but repeated his message in the final hours before voting began.

Both Democrats and Republicans have urged Scots to vote no, saying independence would leave Britain as a diminished power on the world stage.

Bill Clinton this week also called for a no vote in a statement released through the Better Together campaign.
The former president said he worried a "long, complex negotiating proccess" would weaken the Scottish economy and had concerns about Scotland trying to keep the pound as its currency.

Hillary Clinton also said she would "hate" to see Britain "lose" Scotland, adding her voice to Mr Obama's and her husband's.

If the Democrat Party is so in favor of UK unity they should seek a way to heal the wounds between the two main sectors of Great Britain. Instead they use fear mongering to try and make it sound as if the Yes voters are selfish and evil instead of wanting things to change in a direction they see as better than the present.

[ROCKMAN]

T - "If the Democrat Party is so in favor of UK unity..." I suspect part of the motivation is to keep those pesky Texans from getting similar ideas. Too late. LOL.

[Sixstrings]

If the Democrat Party is so in favor of UK unity they should seek a way to heal the wounds between the two main sectors of Great Britain.

(sigh, I'm sorry, another long one)

But it's not like northern Ireland, that's what is so perplexing. Were there really "wounds?"

Here's a poignant article from the English perspective, about what could be the last night of Great Britain. The writer suggests even if the vote goes "no," there will be wounds now, the English feel betrayed:

Scottish independence: How loudly we sang as the Last Night of Great Britain loomed

It was a strange, shape-shifting melancholy summed up by a placard in the crowd that pleaded: “Don’t leave us this way!”

...

Are we still the greatest small island on Earth, a precious stone set in a silver sea, or just another European land mass; different countries with separate agendas? On Tuesday night, Alex Salmond airily told David Dimbleby that an independent Scotland would not be “a foreign country”. What else will it be, you great lummox?

...

Slithy Salmond assured Dimbleby that an independent Scotland would be “the best of pals” with the people it had just left, to be known as “rest of the UK (rUK)”.

Hang on a minute. R u OK with being called rUK, dear reader? Do you want to be mates with Scots who think they can dump us and still keep our pound, our Queen, our TV and radio and probably our granny’s false teeth? Me neither.

“People beyond doubt want to see that shared currency arrangement,” Scotland’s deputy first minister Nicola Sturgeon told Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 on Wednesday. It became clear that Sturgeon’s definition of “people” is Scots who agree with her.

Salmond, Sturgeon and their ilk dinnae give a flying Scotsman what other “people” want. People like the seven in 10 non-Scots who said that we would like Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom. A 300-year-old bond that, outrageously – and, say some international lawyers, illegally – could be severed without our consent. London is the third biggest “Scottish” city, with almost half a million resident Scots. They didn’t get a vote, while overseas students at Scottish universities did. Surely someone’s human rights were being violated?

Salmond and his unmerry men have underestimated the backlash they will face, no matter whether Yes or No wins. Wales is aggrieved about the Barnett formula, which gives Scots more money per capita than any other area of the UK. The English have had it up to here with self-righteous Jocks jabbering about the paradise of social justice they have created – paid for by their evil oppressors in the Home Counties.

One thing has changed for good: the rest of Britain will no longer stand for being excluded from decisions about our future. We must demand a referendum on whether an independent Scotland can keep the pound – our pound, which uses our Bank of England as guarantor. Good luck to Scotland if it wants to be Salmond’s Socialist Republic of Sozzled Softies, but it’s not having our capitalist safety net to rescue its banks and pay its debts. Nor, if they remain within the Union, are Scots getting special devolved privileges and extra cash denied to everyone else in the country.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11102091/Scottish-independence-How-loudly-we-sang-as-the-Last-Night-of-Great-Britain-loomed.html

I don't know, this is like those Ukrainians, I find myself siding with these English.

Scots are people -- but these English in England are people too, doesn't anyone care about them?

I can see their point. They're just trying to keep Scotland happy, but it's like the Canada-Quebec scenario, the more autonomy and money and special treatment you give, the worse it gets and enables the separatists no?

According to the article, the Welsh aren't happy now because the Scots will be getting more money than they do.

There's another wrinkle in all of this regarding the Shefield islands (sp?). Apparently it may want to go with England and if it does then there goes 1/3 of the oil Scotland thinks it will have.

I dunno Tanada, we all call it like we see it, but so far I'm siding with the English -- I get their viewpoint on this, it's their country too yet they get no vote in their nation being ripped apart. The 500,000 scots living London got no vote in it. How is that fair?

I can see their viewpoint, that Scottish nationalists want to break away yet still use the british pound and England's capitalist safety net, to cushion Scotlands new more socialist left experiment in the north. The English don't want a situation where they're supporting not just an autonomous region, but a fully foreign independent nation.

The vote is going to be "no," it looks like, but is Scotland going to keep this up now like Quebec does? Just constantly threatening to secede every five or ten years?

Instead they use fear mongering to try and make it sound as if the Yes voters are selfish and evil instead of wanting things to change in a direction they see as better than the present.

To be fair, the articles I posted quoting the Clintons and the President and congressional leaders, it's not like they're coming down hard on the scots -- they all say "it's up to them" and I imagine this isn't a huge issue in DC but Tanada I guess they just agree with the point I'm making -- financial disruption / problems, balkanization of Europe and our allies, and our #1 ally just splitting up.

Do you think US states should have right of secession? Per SCOTUS ruling in the 19th century, they do not, no state can secede, ever. If any group of people violate the law or impede the federal government then legally, that's just conspiracy to violate federal law. No independence referendum in any state would ever have legal authority.

Our union will endure, because our states aren't allowed to threaten secession if they're not happy with what they get from fair democratic representation in Congress. We'll never have to bend over backwards for Texas, or California, because they're threatening secession.

It's best that way. Whatever happens to the European and British unions, ours will endure.

[Withnail]

Scots are people -- but these English in England are people too, doesn't anyone care about them?

care about us how? what does that even mean?

There's another wrinkle in all of this regarding the Shefield islands (sp?). Apparently it may want to go with England and if it does then there goes 1/3 of the oil Scotland thinks it will have.

It's the Shetland islands, it does not want to go with England, and even if it did it would not get any oil, just a 12 nautical mile zone around its coast.

[Subjectivist]

Six it might interest you to know that England agreed to this vote over two years ago, so it has zero resemblence to the American Civil War.

Change means two things, some people will gain and some people will lose. Scotland already pays more in taxes than they receive in benefits from union, if it were the other way around London would not be pushing so hard for a no vote.

Check out this video on media bias for a no vote. Of course all the media is from London so nobody should be surprised.

http://youtu.be/Ajd4R-9BEIw

[Sixstrings]

care about us how? what does that even mean?

It's a joke, you don't get my humor. But I am saying I can empathize with the sentiments expressed in the article, the English and Welsh side of the story, makes sense to me. And it sounds like Plant and Tanada are for the Scots and I'm just saying to consider the English viewpoint.

Do you have an opinion? If you're British then surely you have an opinion? I won't debate you it's not my business -- I'm interested in this because it's a phenomena going on right now, separatist republics and balkanization, some would call "self-determination:"

Scottish Independence Vote Reignites Separatists Across Europe


http://www.ibtimes.com/scottish-independence-vote-reignites-separatists-across-europe-1689523

P.S. a correction to my earlier posts about the nuke issue. If Scotland does vote yes, then the SNP actually wants the nukes out of there, apparently some or all of UK's nukes are actually in Scotland.

[Withnail]

It's a joke, you don't get my humor. But I am saying I can empathize with the sentiments expressed in the article, the English and Welsh side of the story, makes sense to me. And it sounds like Plant and Tanada are for the Scots and I'm just saying to consider the English viewpoint.

why should the English viewpoint be considered, it's not relevant.

Do you have an opinion? If you're British then surely you have an opinion? I won't debate you it's not my business -- I'm interested in this because it's a phenomena going on right now, separatist republics and balkanization, some would call "self-determination:"

I'm English and in favour of independence.

If it puts a spoke in the wheel of the American war machine as a side benefit, that's good too.

P.S. a correction to my earlier posts about the nuke issue. If Scotland does vote yes, then the SNP actually wants the nukes out of there, apparently some or all of UK's nukes are actually in Scotland.

that's what happens when you get your news from American sources.

[dinopello]

I've never been to England (except the airport) but I've been all over Scotland and it's a beautiful country. I remember staying in a B&B onSkye and the wife telling us that her hubby was away at a Clan meeting. My girlfriend and I were shocked for a minute. Not the same as the Klan in the southern US.

I think the UK officials have made really poor pitches for why they should stay unified. It wouldn't surprise me if the yes vote wins.

[Sixstrings]

why should the English viewpoint be considered, it's not relevant.

Well at least I'm getting an education, here. The history with Scottish independence, and that they're all liberal up there and they're chafing with the conservative south. They don't like Cameron, so they're just gonna secede and not have any wars anymore and be a Denmark, I guess. Well isn't that lovely, but you know, the whole West can't be Denmark or there wouldn't be a West. Somebody's got to defend this place. You really can't just have a europe full of icelands and norways and switzerlands and luxembourgs and expect that to survive in a hostile world.

Unless the US keeps defending everyone, but that's getting old. We used to have the Brits helping us out but if this vote is yes then there goes a big pillar knocked out of NATO.

From what I can gather, England is skeptical, some saying the SNP just wants a lefty socialist experiment peace and rainbows and oil thing up there and get to use the pound and fall back on rUK (rest of UK), cake and eat it too.

So I'm just understanding the other side on this, that they say if Scots want to do that lefty utopia thing then they can join the euro. That you can't have cake and eat it too.

This is hitting some Americans a little hard, it's just unthinkable, the UK split up. UK is rock solid, it's always been there, it doesn't just split up out of nowhere.

Ultimately it looks like it's unthinkable to most Scots too, likely the older voters that aren't so lefty and reading Noam Chomsky books and they remember WWII and the cold war. The NO vote is going to win probably 53-47% there's my prediction.

Luckily common sense has won out over the years, with the Quebec votes, and now Scotland, and they always lose by a few percentage points.

I'm English and in favour of independence.

Well, ok. I sure can't understand that but ok.

Things must be bad over there -- I've bantered about secession for Texas in this thread but really, that's a joke, that's all unthinkable for over here.

If this vote is Yes, then the United States will become the oldest union in the anglo world. I'm glad we're not at risk to these secessionist things, I'm glad it's illegal over here, and our supreme court ruled over a hundred years ago that all the states will be together forever.

If it puts a spoke in the wheel of the American war machine as a side benefit, that's good too.

So would a far left Scotland be anti-American, and drift to Moscow's orbit? Would they join NATO, would they freeload or meet their 2% military GDP goal? This SNP sounds really lefty to me. I get that everyone would love to be a Denmark, I'm sure Vermont over here would love to secede and be a Denmark, but fact remains the West was built by Great Britain and the US and that's our heritage and world wars and the cold war was not won by Denmark or Iceland or Luxembourg or any tiny lefty countries like that.

Good lord, what has happened to Britian. It's just not the same anymore, it's like overrun with green party and noam chomsky types, here we are losing our biggest ally and one of the few NATO states with muscle that meets their military committments.

Where's the Britain that defended the Falkland Islands? The Britain of Churchill and Thatcher? I guess that will be gone forever, along with the flag, along with the very name of your country, with a new lefty Denmark on half the island.

(p.s. what it has to do with england, and how what english think is relevant, is because I imagine some english are just as attached to this:



as I am. And more so. For example, a Texan can't tell me it's not relevant if I'd miss Texas if they secede and there's just a big hole at the bottom of the country where Texas used to be. I'm sure there are english that feel the same about scotland, it's their country too, that whole island and it has been for 400 years now starting with James I.

That, and some english apparently think they'll still have to support Scotland even if it up and leaves them -- backing them up with the british pound, defense, etc. Read that article I posted from the Telegraph, there are english that aren't happy about this at all. And that crowd waving the union jacks, may have been the last night of the United Kingdom and someone's got a sign saying "don't leave us like this" -- that's not sad?)

[Withnail]

Well at least I'm getting an education, here. The history with Scottish independence, and that they're all liberal up there and they're chafing with the conservative south. They don't like Cameron, so they're just gonna secede and not have any wars anymore and be a Denmark, I guess. Well isn't that lovely, but you know, the whole West can't be Denmark or there wouldn't be a West. Somebody's got to defend this place. You really can't just have a europe full of icelands and norways and switzerlands and luxembourgs and expect that to survive in a hostile world.

military, military, NATO, threat, threat, fear, blah blah blah.

nobody is going to launch an armada of ships and invade Scotland for God's sake.

the main threat to Scotland, if there is one, is the English, same as always.

as I am. And more so. For example, a Texan can't tell me it's not relevant if I'd miss Texas if they secede and there's just a big hole at the bottom of the country where Texas used to be.

But Texas will still be there, so will Scotland. You don't mean you will miss them, just that you want them to be ruled from Washington/London.

You don't actually give a toss about what the locals want.

[Sixstrings]

military, military, NATO, threat, threat, fear, blah blah blah.

I've got Sky News on, this came across few minutes ago:

Video of British hostage released

A new video has been released showing a British man believed to be held hostage by Islamic State (IS) militants.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29258201

Now they're talking about how a Scottish man has been arrested for assaulting "no" voters at a polling station.

You know what? You call the US a "war machine." I have a more mainstream view, like in that NY Times oped, that it's the US that was keeping the world moored and a world order and things are all screwed up lately as we have retreated from that.

The UK used to keep order too, with us, and before us they kept order with the British Empire. And so now things unravel and the UK itself dissolves.

You may think it'll be a bright sunny world thereafter and a Scotland can just be a Denmark and "no ships will invade" -- what happens when the Russians start meddling, though? Scotland can't stand up to them.

What happens if this ISIL type crap gets worse? What kind of top notch intel could Scotland put in the field?

Could a Scotland ever hit at ISIL in Iraq? Will a UK be able to defend itself abroad, post breakup? What about those Falklands? None of it matters anymore?

You know, defense is actually a primary duty of a nation state and historically a very big concern. You can't just say "threats, threats, threats, whatever." That only works if you're a Luxembourg or a Denmark and there's a United States or a United Kingdom to protect you.

[Withnail]

military, military, NATO, threat, threat, fear, blah blah blah.

I've got Sky News on this, this came across few minutes ago:

Video of British hostage released

A new video has been released showing a British man believed to be held hostage by Islamic State (IS) militants.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29258201

Now they're talking about how a Scottish man has been arrested for assaulting "no" voters at a polling station.

A Scottish man being arrested is a military issue, is it?

I only live a few miles from Scotland so your paranoia about Scotland being invaded is just preposterous to me. Nothing that exciting will happen here, I guarantee it.

You know what? You call the US a "war machine." I have a more mainstream view, like in that NY Times oped, that it's the US that was keeping the world moored and a world order and things are all screwed up lately as we have retreated from that.

Well of course the New York Times is going to spout such drivel.

You may think it'll be a bright sunny world thereafter and a Scotland can just be a Denmark and "no ships will invade" -- what happens when the Russians start meddling, though? Scotland can't stand up to them.

If armed 'Green Men' suddenly turn up demanding another referendum to join Russia, we'll be sure to let you know.

What happens if this ISIL type crap gets worse? What kind of top notch intel could Scotland put in the field?

Could a Scotland ever hit at ISIL in Iraq?

Scotland will be quietly minding its own business.

There are plenty of other idiots happy to drop bombs all over the Middle East, so they won't be missed.

The best advice is just not to go to countries where you might get your head cut off.

[rockdoc123]

I guess I'm one of the few Scots ex-pats on this forum. There is a bit of perspective I can offer. The vote is so close largely because there are pros and cons to a separate Scotland and also because there are literally centuries of bad feelings that are carried over generation to generation from the long distant past. I think this is more apparent in the north (I have relatives in the Isles and they are all Yes supporters).
The pros as I've heard lately:
- get rid of the friggin english who still seem to want to own our estate lands, close off the fishing for their friends etc. etc.
- we own all that oil from the North Sea, and anymore that will be found North Shetlands
- we get rid of the nuclear arsenal that we all hate
- we have the ability for self determination....better decisions made on where the tax money needs to go
-we can kick the Royals out of their castle and we won't have to put up with that wanker Prince Charles mucking about our moors in his kilt.
- we can charge a hefty tarriff for exporting our fine single malts south of the borders, or better yet keep the good stuff to send to our friends in Canada and sell the dreck to the english!

The cons:
-Scotland is a relatively small country and the economy is not entirely self-sustaining. Trade agreements would have to be forged which aren't easy
- the North Sea oil fields are all quite old, even the relatively new discoveries like Buzzard are past peak production
- the abandonment liabilities in the North Sea are enormous. The companies who own the facilities have to put in place funds to eventually cover abandoment but given the enormous size it is almost certain the government will be on the hook for some cases of "failure to pay". This is in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
- the banks that litter Edinburgh may just decide to up and relocate
- the tax base in Scotland isn't all that large so revenues from oil are essential, making the country more vulnerable than it was to price fluctuations
-there are many Scots living in London and many English living in places like Aberdeen and Edinburgh....the division isn't as obvious as it once was.
- we have to keep Glasgow.

Obviously some of it is said jokingly but it is a hot topic of discussion not just amongst the Scots ex-pats I know but also many Canadians who have Scottish roots. It is interesting how long resentment for past deeds can hang on. A lot of the mass immigration from Scotland into places like Nova Scotia happened following the highland clearances at the end of the Jacobite rebellion. This was a time where English landlords forced Scots from their homes so the land could be turned to grazing. You don't have to look far to find a 3rd generation Canadian whose ancestors suffered the clearances who would have some nasty things to say about the English even though they may never have actually met anyone from there.

Personally (and again being an ex-pat my view doesn't really count) I think Scotland is better off as part of Great Britain mainly from an economic standpoint. That being said this is a great opportunity to drag further concessions out of London.

For those here who want to understand Scotland a bit better I recommend reading a great book:

"How the Scots invented the World: the true story of how Western Europes poorest nation created our world and everything in it". It was written by an American...Arthur Herman. A fascinating read and I think you will be surprised in the overall impact the Scots have had in many areas over the years.

[dinopello]

- we have to keep Glasgow.

Glasgow was my favorite city we visited in Scotland. The people and pubs seemed friendlier than the other cities. And there was always some drunken singer wandering the streets at night adding ambiance.

[hvacman]

"How the Scots invented the World: the true story of how Western Europes poorest nation created our world and everything in it".

Yes, we in the power and energy circles owe a great deal to the Scotch engineers - Steam-engine-inventor James Watt (for which the electrical power unit"watt" was named after) is a prime example. "Scotch Marine" boilers revolutionized powered marine transportation and and are still used to this day for steam and hot water generation. Note there's a reason the Star Ship Enterprise's engine room engineer on Star Trek was nicknamed "Scotty" and spoke with a brogue:)

[rockdoc123]

You need to understand the healthy sense of humor Scots have .....always poking fun at themselves and no where is it more apparent than making fun of Glaswegians.

Here are a couple of examples:

BBC News: Parts of Glasgow are to be made to look post apocalyptic for Brad Pitt's new film.

Residents are said to be elated with the renovation of their houses.

I'm surprised the rescue teams looking for Flight MH370 haven't drafted in some Glaswegians.

Then told them "There's a drinks trolley down there, and it's finders keepers"

Why does the river Clyde run through Glasgow?

Because, if it walked it would get stabbed.

Heres a good laugh at the expense of Glaswegians....(remembering Billy is one)

Billy Connolly makes fun of terrorist attack at Glasgow Airport

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gMJBQoHJ4E