Corcaigh Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 My money is on Unionist Labour spearheading a successful NO campaign, with vague promises of more devolution measures when they're back in power, as a prelude to them wiping out the Scottish Lib Dems in the 2015 UK GE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 My money is on Unionist Labour spearheading a successful NO campaign, with vague promises of more devolution measures when they're back in power, as a prelude to them wiping out the Scottish Lib Dems in the 2015 UK GE. A view I would subscribe to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted October 18, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 18, 2012 in the 2015 UK GE. So depressing that we have to wait so long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 So depressing that we have to wait so long Thank you, Liberal Democrats ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Taking that map at colour face value, you'd wonder how the Tories could ever not win an election! they would have got away with it but for those pesky northerners :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 But that does not make them a 'Southern England National Party'. Which is a nonsense view - they support British interest, not necessarily 'Southern English' interest, and are 'for' anyone with some wealth. There is considerable Tory support countrywide, despite the fact that there is that correlation, they aren't even close to anything like a regional national party - for a start I don't think many people in, lets say Harrogate, vote for Plaid Cyrmu, but Tories get votes from Land's End to John o'Groats. that is the bottom line, there really can't be any debate, tories get votes everywhere, they have no interest in England breaking away (I have voted Plaid!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted October 18, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 18, 2012 On the Plaid note, I distinctly remember absolutely flummoxing a canvasser for them when I was at uni in Aber. They came and knocked on our door, I was the only one in, and they basically did the 'will you vote for us' spiel. My reply was simply 'No, because I don't believe in what you stand for', and the woman looked genuinely shocked, as if the concept of anyone, let alone a Brummie student in a town full of students, not supporting Plaid Cymru, was like spitting in her face. I imagine these people must have heard similar things all day long but apparently not this woman. For what it's worth on this entire subject, I'm rather against nationalism on any front, Welsh, Scottish, Cornish... it's all arbitrary and pointless and daft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 For what it's worth on this entire subject, I'm rather against nationalism on any front, Welsh, Scottish, Cornish... it's all arbitrary and pointless and daft. :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: I'd even throw patriotism in there as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 yep, I'd agree with all that, arbitrary nonesense that ultimately leads to us all just staying in our own village disliking anything different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 yep, I'd agree with all that, arbitrary nonesense that ultimately leads to us all just staying in our own village disliking anything different I do that already without any need for an independence referendum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Ugh, I'd rather it doesn't turn into a nationalist/unionist thing. 'I want to be Scottish/British, my identity is important!!' That's all a pile of shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 19, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 19, 2012 Well I'm more English than British, more British than European, more European than Anglophone, more Anglophone than world citizen, but more world citizen than English. Go figure. Oh, and I've lived in Yorkshire for forty years, yet I'm a Brummie. Everybody's different, everybody's the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 Everybody's different, everybody's the same. Tell that to Nick Griffin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 The Scottish want independence, how cute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 19, 2012 Moderator Share Posted October 19, 2012 In today's news, the SNP claim they wish to be part of NATO but want to kick Trident out of Faslane ASAP Do they think anything through? Now I'm all for getting rid of Trident full stop but I can't see how you can just evict a nuclear submarine facility and especially as you still want to be a part of the defence organisation that it is an intrinsic part of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 In today's news, the SNP claim they wish to be part of NATO but want to kick Trident out of Faslane ASAP Do they think anything through? Now I'm all for getting rid of Trident full stop but I can't see how you can just evict a nuclear submarine facility and especially as you still want to be a part of the defence organisation that it is an intrinsic part of. ah no, to be fair they explained and expanded on that this morning They don't want to be nuclear, but they want to be in NATO but they don't want NATO to have a 'first strike' strategy, so fairydust fairydust, they want to be a bit like (insert scandinavian country name that fits this wish list item) and be covered by a nuclear protection, but nuke free and morally superior themselves, fairydust fairydust, they'll replace the jobs lost through kicking out trident by building their own conventional navy there instead. This can be funded by fairydust fairydust lots of talk about per centages of this that and the other. The more detail is picked over in the next 2 years, the lower the independence vote goes. What the 'no' campaign have to be careful about in my opinion is not rubbing their noses in the facts too much and getting the arguement flipped into an us vs them emotional choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 19, 2012 Moderator Share Posted October 19, 2012 Yes I notice they didn't actually name this "Northern European Country", quite careful not to do that Next they'll be asking Norway if they'd like to take them under their wing and share each others oil. It's only fair after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 NATO HYPOCRISY IS A PROFOUND MISJUDGEMENT SAY SCOTTISH GREENS Scottish Greens have described the SNP's change of policy on NATO as moral hypocrisy, and a terrible misjudgement that will alienate anti-nuclear Scots who are still considering whether to vote for independence. Patrick Harvie, MSP for Glasgow and Co-convener of the Scottish Greens, said: "Rather than building a platform of distinctive policies that make the case for a radically better Scotland, the SNP leadership seem determined to quash the party's better instincts. "It is moral hypocrisy of the worst kind to be so vocal in opposition to Trident but in favour of an alliance based on the nuclear protection of other states. This is a profound misjudgement that sets the face of the SNP against radical Scotland at a time when they should be energising campaigners. Mr Harvie added: "The SNP have also backed a policy of spending at least £2.5billion every year on defence in an independent Scotland. The idea of a NATO-backed minimum spend on defence is highly disturbing and seems designed to fall into step with the military posture of the UK and US, aggressively projecting power around the world. “Ultimately, this is now SNP policy but no more than that. We are some way away from the first elections in an independent Scotland, and if and when that happens Scottish Greens will put a strong case opposing NATO membership to the people. "Meanwhile we continue to welcome everyone who wants a to be part of a truly anti-nuclear, anti-war party to join the Scottish Greens, and work towards a peaceful future." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 I'm not sure what meaningful defence net they could purchase for £2.5 billion that would actually justify the spend in tbe first place. If they're buying a few toy anti-sub frigates perhaps, then they'll need aircover too. Not forgetting manpower and training costs. They might as well stay under the UK defence umbrella. But then if the currency and defence of the realm is seccured in Westminster, whats the point of this independance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 I'm not sure what meaningful defence net they could purchase for £2.5 billion that would actually justify the spend in tbe first place. If they're buying a few toy anti-sub frigates perhaps, then they'll need aircover too. Not forgetting manpower and training costs. They might as well stay under the UK defence umbrella. But then if the currency and defence of the realm is seccured in Westminster, whats the point of this independance? It seems to be an emotional thing. For the SNP, independence is an end in itself. Possibly for that reason, the detailed policies don't matter as much as independence - they haven't decided on independence as a goal because it will deliver better outcomes in a range of areas; the policies follow on from the goal. The Greens also support independence, by about 60-40 or 70-30, and as a possible means to an end, so that if the terms on which independence is possible change, then the policy may also change. They are also quite comfortable with individual party members opposing independence, because again, it's a means to an end and not an overriding principle. They are working with the "yes" campaign, but as the press release I quoted earlier shows, with some degree of wariness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts