Scottish Independence - What say you?

Nodin

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Catholics are a race

Aye. If you x-ray them, their heads look like Popes hats.

woodoo

The interesting thing about all this is that after 2 and a half years of debate it may well end stirring English nationalism up. I suspect Salmond knows that over that length of time things may get said that drive a wedge between Scotland and England.

LordSutch

woodoo wrote: »

The interesting thing about all this is that after 2 and a half years of debate it may well end stirring English nationalism up. I suspect Salmond knows that over that length of time things may get said that drive a wedge between Scotland and England.

Quite right, Salmond is a master tacticion and he has this well planned, the longer the lead up to the referendum lasts (over two years away) the more entrenched the opinions & bad feelings will be in both England & Scotland, Salmond will of course use these extra eighteen months to brainwash the youth of today, so that by Autumn 2014 he may well have the vote in his favour (a manufactured vote of course) where the then sixteen/seventeen year olds may vote in his favour, and possibly break up the United Kingdom?

Personally I think Salmonds two year 'hiatus' before the vote is damaging to the UK as a whole, (and possibly damaging inward investment to Scotland), and if not checked it will certainly cause rifts, not just between England & Scotland, but within Scotland herself.

And what about all the Scots who live and work in the rest of the UK who won't be able to vote? How might they feel about Scotland becoming a foreign country outside the UK? Personally I think they 'as Scots' should also have a vote!

Someone needs to put it up to Salmond soon, someone needs to face off Salmond and champion the Pro-UK corner. Quite who that champion will be, still remains a mystery though, and so far I cant see anyone one person emerging as an antidote to Mr Salmond's anti-UK rhetoric . . .

bwatson

Nodin wrote: »

Yeah, it's just all downhill at the moment for them


http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/298664/Poll-Now-51-back-independence

Deary me Nodin.

You are exactly the sort who would usually (quite smugly) dismiss a British newspaper such as the Express as a right wing little englander rag. Or, more likely you would have added your thanks to the post of someone who had posted something similar so as to show your position but not leave yourself liable to be confronted for holding fairly unpleasant views on many topics relating to the United Kingdom.

Its rather amusing that you now have actually posted a source from a publication with a very obvious political leaning. Moving onto the Daily Mail next?

dlofnep

LordSutch wrote: »

Salmond will of course use these extra eighteen months to brainwash the youth of today, so that by Autumn 2014 he may well have the vote in his favour (a manufactured vote of course) where the then sixteen/seventeen year olds may vote in his favour, and possibly break up the United Kingdom?

This is the type of rhetoric that detractors of Scottish independence will go to, because they have nothing of substance to say. Gutter analysis at it's finest. Alex Salmond isn't brainwashing anyone. He and his party are putting forward a case for an independent Scotland and if members of the public agree with the proposals - they are doing so of their own free will.

Someone needs to put it up to Salmond soon, someone needs to face off Salmond and champion the Pro-UK corner. Quite who that champion will be, still remains a mystery though

If the UK was such the utopia you'd claim it was, then it would sell on it's own merits. The fact of the matter is - you have the SNP against every major political party in Britain, and every major media outlet in Britain - and despite this, the SNP and public opinion towards independence is growing and growing (at a majority according to the latest polls).

Face it - Salmond is mopping the unionist case up, and he's making it look easy.

A Dub in Glasgo

LordSutch wrote: »

Salmond will of course use these extra eighteen months to brainwash the youth of today, so that by Autumn 2014 he may well have the vote in his favour (a manufactured vote of course) where the then sixteen/seventeen year olds may vote in his favour, and possibly break up the United Kingdom?

Oh I see, brain washing can only happen from the pro-independence side

And what about all the Scots who live and work in the rest of the UK who won't be able to vote? How might they feel about Scotland becoming a foreign country outside the UK? Personally I think they 'as Scots' should also have a vote!

Only people eligible to vote in current elections in Scotland will be able to vote [notwithstanding the extension of voting sought by the SNP]. Those folk who live in the rest of the UK can move back to Scotland to register their vote in the referendum. They will have enough time to sort out the logistics!

dlofnep

bwatson wrote: »

Its rather amusing that you now have actually posted a source from a publication with a very obvious political leaning. Moving onto the Daily Mail next?

Yes, one which has a strong political leaning towards unionism - which makes the poll results all that more impressive

bwatson

LordSutch wrote: »

Quite right, Salmond is a master tacticion and he has this well planned, the longer the lead up to the referendum lasts (over two years away) the more entrenched the opinions & bad feelings will be in both England & Scotland, Salmond will of course use these extra eighteen months to brainwash the youth of today, so that by Autumn 2014 he may well have the vote in his favour (a manufactured vote of course) where the then sixteen/seventeen year olds may vote in his favour, and possibly break up the United Kingdom?

Personally I think Salmonds two year 'hiatus' before the vote is damaging to the UK as a whole, (and possibly damaging inward investment to Scotland), and if not checked it will certainly cause rifts, not just between England & Scotland, but within Scotland herself.

And what about all the Scots who live and work in the rest of the UK who won't be able to vote? How might they feel about Scotland becoming a foreign country outside the UK? Personally I think they 'as Scots' should also have a vote!

Someone needs to put it up to Salmond soon, someone needs to face off Salmond and champion the Pro-UK corner. Quite who that champion will be, still remains a mystery though, and so far I cant see anyone one person emerging as an antidote to Mr Salmond's anti-UK rhetoric . . .

Some Scots are genuinely scared that big Salmond could end up with his own little country. The man is on a mega ego trip, make no mistake about it. As a politician he certainly has qualities - the main being the ability to whip up a nationalist frenzy and the ability to evade questions where answers with real substance are required.

bwatson

dlofnep wrote: »

Yes, one which has a strong political leaning towards unionism - which makes the poll results all that more impressive

What is your own position on Scottish independence? Like Batsy you have stated that you would not be particularly affronted either way, yet like Batsy you make considerable contributions showing an obvious leaning. The one quoted here being the most recent example. Why not just admit you wish to see the disintegration of the United Kingdom?

LordSutch

dlofnep wrote: »

This is the type of rhetoric that detractors of Scottish independence will go to, because they have nothing of substance to say.
Gutter analysis at it's finest. Alex Salmond isn't brainwashing anyone. He and his party are putting forward a case for an independent Scotland and if members of the public agree with the proposals - they are doing so of their own free will.

Gutter analysis at it's finest is it? I thought #304 had substance, its also my considered opinion, and I still say that stringing out the referendum for another eighteen months is designed to swell the anti-UK ranks in Scotland & England, against the flow of the current consensus that would see Scotland vote stay in the Union. I also think my point about brainwashing the youth of today in preparation for a vote "designed & orchestrated by him" is a valid one.

dlofnep

bwatson wrote: »

What is your own position on Scottish independence?

I support Scottish independence, like the vast majority of people in this thread.

LordSutch

dlofnep wrote: »

I support Scottish independence, like the vast majority of people in this thread.

But Why? Why do you support Scottish independence (the break-up of the UK), and what good will it do you?

Are you Scottish?

dlofnep

LordSutch wrote: »

Gutter analysis at it's finest is it? I thought #304 had substance, its also my considered opinion, and I still say that stringing out the referendum for another eighteen months is designed to swell the anti-UK ranks in Scotland & England, against the flow of the current consensus that would see Scotland vote stay in the Union.

Yes, it's gutter politics to claim that Alex Salmond is brainwashing the population. You use carefully selective words like 'anti-UK' - He is not anti-UK, he is pro Scottish independence.. A consequence of which would be Scotland's departure from the union.

I also think my point about brainwashing the youth of today in preparation for a vote "designed & orchestrated by him" is a valid one.

No, it isn't. It's a clumsy analysis of his remarkable work at selling an idea of a free Scotland, where the Scottish people alone would control their own affairs. Never in my life have I see such disdain towards democracy.

Proponents of Scottish independence don't have to engage in mud-slinging like you are doing. The idea of an independent Scotland is self-selling, and self-perpetuating. It doesn't need people to accuse others of 'brainwashing', or being racists, bigots, anti-English, or whatever other mud you can sling.

bwatson

dlofnep wrote: »

I support Scottish independence, like the vast majority of people in this thread.

Why so?

Is this a position you have taken up this evening on account of the statistics published by the Sunday Express? I would be surprised if this were not the case. With every other poll suggesting that at the moment the Scots are firmly in favour of remaining a constituant country of the United Kingdom, it would indicate a motive other than a wish for the desires of the Scottish people to be recognised.

I'm pleased that Irish republicans such as yourself and that Nodin chap are now placing trust in the integrity of right wing British news publications however.

dlofnep

LordSutch wrote: »

But Why? Why do you support Scottish independence (the break-up of the UK), and what good will it do you?

I feel it would be a far more democratic country, where the Scottish people would no longer live under the governance of a political party which has no mandate in Scotland and never receives a mandate from the public there.

Benefits also include Scotland being able to determine it's own foreign policies, and not spend billions on immoral, illogical or illegal wars in the middle-east.

But most importantly - I support it because it would allow the Scottish people alone to determine their own political affairs, instead of having David Cameron and his ilk dictate to Scotland what it can or cannot do.

LordSutch wrote: »

Are you Scottish?

No, I'm not - but I'm perfectly capable of having an opinion on the matter like the 350+ other people who have voted in the poll, regardless of my nationality.

KeithAFC

bwatson wrote: »

What is your own position on Scottish independence? Like Batsy you have stated that you would not be particularly affronted either way, yet like Batsy you make considerable contributions showing an obvious leaning. The one quoted here being the most recent example. Why not just admit you wish to see the disintegration of the United Kingdom?

That is the aim for all Irish Republicans to see the destruction of the Union. It is important that Unionists stand up to it.

bwatson

dlofnep wrote: »

I feel it would be a far more democratic country, where the Scottish people would no longer live under the governance of a political party which has no mandate in Scotland and never receives a mandate from the public there.

Benefits also include Scotland being able to determine it's own foreign policies, and not spend billions on immoral, illogical or illegal wars in the middle-east.

I assume you are referring to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We clearly disagree on whether these wars were justified however that is not an issue here. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan with a Scottish Prime Minister and a labour party with (by anyone's standards) one hell of a mandate in Scotland at the helm.

Maybe you meant you hope to see Scottish independence so that English, Welsh and Irish troops are not dragged into "immoral, illogical or illegal wars in the middle-east"? Or, as I somewhat suspect, are you just another of these Irish republicans who thinks he has some sort of close relationship with the Scottish people, which runs deeper than the connections between the constituant countries of the Union?

TroikaBox

KeithAFC wrote: »

That is the aim for all Irish Republicans to see the destruction of the Union. It is important that Unionists stand up to it.

Is it not just about the North of Ireland though? I gather that most die hard Republicans simply want the UK to remain outside of the island of Ireland, not that the actual union itself should be dissolved.

LordSutch

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it isn't. It's a clumsy analysis of his remarkable work at selling an idea of a free Scotland, where the Scottish people alone would control their own affairs. Never in my life have I see such disdain towards democracy.

Proponents of Scottish independence don't have to engage in mud-slinging like you are doing. The idea of an independent Scotland is self-selling, and self-perpetuating. It doesn't need people to accuse others of 'brainwashing', or being racists, bigots, anti-English, or whatever other mud you can sling.

Mud slinging? compared to some of the posts in this thread I wouldn't say I was mud slinging in Post #304, I thought I was quite mild mannered in my thoughts. Anyway, I take your points (which I disagree with), and I still say that two years+ is too long to wait for a referendum that may very well break up the United Kingdom. This massive question will now be hanging over every politician's head for over two years, two years in which we don't know if the UK will still exist (or not)! I'll finish by saying that Salmond is cynically using the sixteen year old vote argument, knowing full well that with their support he may well win the referendum, which will 'if won' break up the UK.

Time is on Mr Salmond's side, & he's calling all the shots, including voting age . . . .

No mud slinging intended dlofnep.

KeithAFC

TroikaBox wrote: »

Is it not just about the North of Ireland though? I gather that most die hard Republicans simply want the UK to remain outside of the island of Ireland, not that the actual union itself should be dissolved.

Nope. They have a strategy and are determined to reach that objective. It is important Unionists stand up to it and face this political challenge from dark forces in British politics.

markesmith

LordSutch wrote: »

But Why? Why do you support Scottish independence (the break-up of the UK), and what good will it do you?

Are you Scottish?

It would surely be better if Scotland was ruled from Edinburgh as opposed to London. There'll be a period of economic transition, but it's necessary.

Eventually it'll be better for Norn Iron to be ruled from Belfast...or Dublin. It just stands to reason that proximity to the place you're administrating is the best outcome.

TroikaBox

KeithAFC wrote: »

Nope. They have a strategy and are determined to reach that objective. It is important Unionists stand up to it and face this political challenge from dark forces in British politics.

My knowledge of the provisional and real IRA isn't great, so I will do some more research before commenting. You are correct though, the IRA are responsible for many needless deaths and misery.

All forms of terrorist activities should be treated with the utmost contempt. The real and provisional IRA are no different. They're a great shame of this island in my own opinion. If the majority of Ulster is happy to remain in the UK, I don't see why it should even be an issue

Belfast is a very nice city if I may so myself http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0620/1224299225080.html

LordSutch

markesmith wrote: »

It would surely be better if Scotland was ruled from Edinburgh as opposed to London.

Yes of course, and it is, and that's what devolution is all about, same with the administration in Wales, and the same with the Assembly in Northern Ireland, all parts of the UK, and all ruled locally by their own administrations, whilst all coming under the much bigger umbrella as part of the United Kingdom.

markesmith wrote: »

Eventually it'll be better for Norn Iron to be ruled from Belfast...or Dublin. It just stands to reason that proximity to the place you're administrating is the best outcome.

But Belfast has its own devolved assembly! First Minister Peter Robinson & his deputy Martin McGuinness are running the place.

markesmith

LordSutch wrote: »

Yes of course, and it is, and that's what devolution is all about, same with the administration in Wales, and the same with the Assembly in Northern Ireland, all parts of the UK, and all ruled locally by their own administrations, whilst all coming under the much bigger umbrella as part of the United Kingdom.

I guess Scotland wants more. It's got a lot of history independent of England, and there's quite a few people up there who will always see the UK/GB/BI/whatever as 'England and a few countries that they annexed in the past for strategic reasons'.

LordSutch wrote: »

But Belfast has its own devolved assembly! First Minister Peter Robinson & his deputy Martin McGuinness are running the place.

That's a fair point.

woodoo

Batsy wrote: »

Of course there is a problem in Scotland of anti-Catholic hatred, but it cannot be understood without also factoring in anti-Irish racism.

They are intertwined because of the history of large scale Irish immigration in Scotland at the height of the British Empire when Ireland was very much a colonial possession of the London Imperium.
c.

And they must forget that their people came to Ireland uninvited too. And are still their occupying part of the island.

dlofnep

LordSutch wrote: »

Yes of course, and it is, and that's what devolution is all about, same with the administration in Wales, and the same with the Assembly in Northern Ireland, all parts of the UK, and all ruled locally by their own administrations, whilst all coming under the much bigger umbrella as part of the United Kingdom.

Devolution is not the same as full-blown independence. So no - that is not what devolution is all about. Devolution came about to try and curb nationalist sentiment, that grew tired of Westminster dictating all local affairs. The UK was wholly undemocratic, and devolution was only the first step at addressing that. Bearing in mind that devolution is a catch-all word, and doesn't state exactly which powers are devolved.

You can see a list of reserved and excepted matter here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserved_and_excepted_matters#List_of_key_reserved_matters

LordSutch wrote: »

But Belfast has its own devolved assembly! First Minister Peter Robinson & his deputy Martin McGuinness are running the place.

No, they aren't. It is controlled from Westminster. Many areas are devolved, but many others are still reserved for Westminster alone.

sandmanporto

Why do Irish people care? After all it was mostly scottish that planted in the north contrary to what many here believe were the english. Why should we care they caused enough grief for ireland because they were part of the union to start with WHO CARES. I'm more concerned about the Irish economy

dlofnep

sandmanporto wrote: »

I'm more concerned about the Irish economy

Then get off AH which is designed for an array of different topics, where people can express their opinions, and start posting in this forum: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1196 - Nobody is forcing you to participate in this thread.

Nodin

LordSutch wrote: »

Quite right, Salmond is a master tacticion and he has this well planned, the longer the lead up to the referendum lasts (over two years away) the more entrenched the opinions & bad feelings will be in both England & Scotland, Salmond will of course use these extra eighteen months to brainwash the youth of today, so that by Autumn 2014 he may well have the vote in his favour (a manufactured vote of course) where the then sixteen/seventeen year olds may vote in his favour, and possibly break up the United Kingdom?
............. . .

Campaign for independence = "brainwash the youth of today"

Campaign against independence = "champion the Pro-UK corner"

I can see this is going to be a reasonable debate.

Niles

The way I see it, if the majority of the Scottish people want Independence let them, if the majority want to remain part of Britain let them. Simples.