nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Scottish Independence discussion area

anishboi

Can't seem to find a good discussion thread anywhere, so as time is getting closer, I'll get the ball rolling here.

What are your views for/against Scottish independence?

If you don't have a view, do you think it'll happen?

Personally, I think Alex Salmond seems to be turning heads at an extremely fast rate, but I'm neutral on the matter.

Find more posts tagged with

scotland the not

so brave

Quick Links

Comments

Iwasfrozen

GaelMise wrote: »

It seems that in the period where people really start to make up their minds, the pro-union lead turned out to be fairly soft.

Yeah I would agree with that. It seems the yes side did a better job of convincing the "don't knows" than the no side.

LiveIsLife

LordSutch wrote: »

If there is a Yes vote it will be one of the most momentous events in the hstory of these islands. It really would be a massive event if Scotlasnd actually left the UK, and I'm not sure that people fully understand the enormity of an exit, or the implications for Scotland & whats left of the UK.

From the armed forces to the NHS, to the stability of NI, to the UKs place on the world stage, to an independent scotlands economic threat to the ROI. Then there's Camerons position as PM (of the remainder of the UK) which would be seriously called into question!

Scotlands exit might also spur other regions/countries in europe to consider seperation too, which wouldn't be too popular in Spain & Italy for example.

Hopefully Scotland will stay in the Union with the offer of 'Devo Max' saving the day. Devo Max really should have been on the ballot paper IMO.

Yep it's amazing to think we could be living through the breakup of the UK, something nobody would really have thought possible even a few years ago. Now it looks a distinct possibility

GaelMise

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yeah I would agree with that. It seems the yes side did a better job of convincing the "don't knows" than the no side.

Would still be failry surprised if they vote for independance on the day though. The union was kept together in the mind for a long time by a feeling of 'it can't be done, it'll never happen'. Scots are beginning to realise that they really can put an end to the union if they want to, which is still a bit surreal for many. Having come to it though, it still remains to be seen if they are able to take the last step.

Dyr

See the royals have lined up a new sprogg in response to the crisis, can't fault them for effort

A Dub in Glasgo

More comedy gold from https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond

Fratton Fred

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yeah I would agree with that. It seems the yes side did a better job of convincing the "don't knows" than the no side.

Or maybe people are thinking "if we say yes in the polls, we'll get promised more and more, even though we will vote no". They'd be daft not to in fairness.

Iwasfrozen

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Or maybe people are thinking "if we say yes in the polls, we'll get promised more and more, even though we will vote no". They'd be daft not to in fairness.

People as a group aren't that logical.

GaelMise wrote:

Would still be failry surprised if they vote for independance on the day though. The union was kept together in the mind for a long time by a feeling of 'it can't be done, it'll never happen'. Scots are beginning to realise that they really can put an end to the union if they want to, which is still a bit surreal for many. Having come to it though, it still remains to be seen if they are able to take the last step.

Same. I think on the day most will vote to keep the union.

LiveIsLife

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Or maybe people are thinking "if we say yes in the polls, we'll get promised more and more, even though we will vote no". They'd be daft not to in fairness.

Jesus that is some level of grasping

A Dub in Glasgo

The BBC has shed it's veneer of public service broadcasting

A Dub in Glasgo

LiveIsLife wrote: »

Jesus that is some level of grasping

I presumed he was extracting the urine

Red Nissan

What happened to the [img][/img]?

cloud493

Images don't work on AH.

Red Nissan

cloud493 wrote: »

Images don't work on AH.

Well blow me down with a feather, never knew that. Thanks.

Billy86

cloud493 wrote: »

Images don't work on AH.

For some weird reason, they do when you're viewing on a phone.

It's amazing how the English channels have all kicked into high gear scaremongering in the last few days.

feargale

feargale wrote: »

What was India before 1948? Egypt in the 19th century? "The Kingdom of Ireland" in the 18th century?

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Colony, colony

"Mohammed which colony do you come from?"

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

and kingdom/region.

Which region won the rugby triple crown in 1899?

Fratton Fred

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I presumed he was extracting the urine

Helping the yes side save face for when they lose.

Happyman42

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I presumed he was extracting the urine

Unionists in denial.
Wonder what they will call their political beliefs if the 'Union' breaks up?

Billy86

Reunionists?

Iwasfrozen

I'm pretty sure they'd still be unionists....

Happyman42

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I'm pretty sure they'd still be unionists....

I'm pretty sure they would then be pointless.

kingchess

Scotland,Wales and England are Countries,but are not independent-because they do not have full control over their own affairs, the United Kingdom is an independent Country,(all information thanks to the all wise Google)

Muahahaha

Bambi wrote: »

See the royals have lined up a new sprogg in response to the crisis, can't fault them for effort

The Guardian reported that David Cameroon spent most of yesterday in a meeting with the Queen dubbed 'crisis talks'. Apparantly the YouGov poll that showed the Yes side in the lead for the first time sent shivers up her spine. I'd say she is none too happy with Cameroon right now so if the Yes side do win his head is really on the line because no doubt Boris Johnson is sitting in the background sharpening the knives and thinking of a leadership bid in advance of the general election next year.

In any case Id say the Queen is furious about how this is now playing out. No one ever thought an independent Scotland possible and now it has become a very possible reality. Just to make matters more interesting the Guardian reported that the Queen is due to be in Scotland on the day of the vote. It'll be interesting to watch the media management of the Queen if Scottish people literally vote her off the land in front of her very eyes ! The offical line from Buckingham Palace yesterday was that the Queen stays neutral on the Scottish issue but her hours long emergency meeting with Cameroon seems to suggest the complete opposite. She is pulling strings in the background to ensure Scotland remains part of the union. An independent Scotland means no more Balmoral garden parties in the summer, the horror !

In any case if the yes side does prevail then Alex Salmond is going to be a very busy man. In the first few months alone he would have to-
-Immediately make a statement to the markets with the Bank of England regarding Scottish debt, Sterling
-Begin nehotiations as to NATO status
-Meet all 27 EU members to discuss membership for an independent Scotland.

He could be a very busy man if he pulls off independence.

eeepaulo

Spare a thought for all the normal people of northern ireland, wales and england

Iwasfrozen

Happyman42 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure they would then be pointless.

You really have it in for unionists and I've never understood why, believing that all the people of the British Isles should be united under one government is a legitimate political aspiration.

porsche959

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You really have it in for unionists and I've never understood why, believing that all the people of the British Isles should be united under one government is a legitimate political aspiration.

United under one government is interesting and perhaps revealing choice of expression.

Republicans prefer government to be answerable to the people, which is why we reject feudalism/monarchy.

porsche959

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Or maybe people are thinking "if we say yes in the polls, we'll get promised more and more, even though we will vote no". They'd be daft not to in fairness.

I find this a rather dodgy thesis, but if you are correct, the concessions being made by the London establishment are fairly sketchy though, aren't they.

You'd think that an oil rich nation might be offered guarantees of some of its oil revenues, for example.

Iwasfrozen

porsche959 wrote: »

United under one government is interesting and perhaps revealing choice of expression.

I hate to tell you but in a republic we are united under the government.

Republicans prefer government to be answerable to the people, which is why we reject feudalism/monarchy.

That doesn't follow. The government of a constitutional monarchy is just as answerable to its citizens as the government of a republic.

Also don't equate unionism with monarchism, a person can be a republican unionist, i.e. desire to see all the people of the British Isles united under a republic.

sinead88

I'm Irish but I've lived in Edinburgh for the last 4 years. I plan on voting yes. I do a lot of volunteering for the Yes Scotland campaign, canvassing, leafleting, and helping at street stalls. The atmosphere here just now is absolutely amazing in that the majority of Scotland is completely engaged in the debate. I've met plenty of people who have never bothered to vote before, who are now actively involved in campaigning. Although the SNP is obviously at the forefront of the Yes side in the referendum, it is the people, rather than politicians who are pushing the campaign forward. It is a real grassroots effort, which has become a social movement that has brought all sorts of people from multiple backgrounds together. Regardless of the outcome of the referendum, the feeling we all now have, that the people of the country can make a real difference to the running of it, can only be a good thing. Also, I can say with certainty that the Yes campaign has nothing to do with nationalism and everything to do with the desire for real democracy.

Iwasfrozen

sinead88 wrote: »

I'm Irish but I've lived in Edinburgh for the last 4 years. I plan on voting yes. I do a lot of volunteering for the Yes Scotland campaign, canvassing, leafleting, and helping at street stalls. The atmosphere here just now is absolutely amazing in that the majority of Scotland is completely engaged in the debate. I've met plenty of people who have never bothered to vote before, who are now actively involved in campaigning. Although the SNP is obviously at the forefront of the Yes side in the referendum, it is the people, rather than politicians who are pushing the campaign forward. It is a real grassroots effort, which has become a social movement that has brought all sorts of people from multiple backgrounds together. Regardless of the outcome of the referendum, the feeling we all now have, that the people of the country can make a real difference to the running of it, can only be a good thing. Also, I can say with certainty that the Yes campaign has nothing to do with nationalism and everything to do with the desire for real democracy.

Scotland could be on the verge of social unrest if this referendum is defeated. you've got a highly divided population and that's not a good thing.

jank

porsche959 wrote: »

United under one government is interesting and perhaps revealing choice of expression.

Republicans prefer government to be answerable to the people, which is why we reject feudalism/monarchy.

China is a republic (and North Korea), yet its political system is more akin to feudalism than anything else. Sweden and the Netherlands are constitutional monarchies. Which country do you think gives the individual more power and say in the political process.