glasgow sheep Posted January 12, 2012 Report Posted January 12, 2012 Ooooooh doing it on st andrews day is a nice and quite clever touch imo As clever as a sledge hammer to the napper Quote
rocket_scientist Posted January 12, 2012 Report Posted January 12, 2012 I'm for independence simply on the premise that it's easier to manage a smaller organisation than a larger one. And not so easy for corrupt politicians to get away with it. Especially how thick we Scots are. We can't even steal cleverly. Then the fun will start. Fifers v. Dundeh. The roch of Glesga byraway v. the pseudo wannabes in Embra. Newton Mearns v Eaglesham. Cardenden v. Lochgelly. Border toun v. border toun. NE v. a cunt Sutherland v Caithness Central belt v the rest and all done with an underlying shitey Labour-voting pack mentality, a nation of lazy bastards. Aye it'll be fun until it settles sown, if indeed it ever does but as Ewan said in trainspotting, better than getting fucked by effete guffy cunts like Blair and Boris amd Milliband and all the rest of those disgusting fucks in West Minister, as the tcheuchie said on the news. Quote
Kowalski Posted January 12, 2012 Author Report Posted January 12, 2012 Nicola Sturgeon is a terrible advert for the SNP. Taken to the cleaners by Paddy Ashdown and David Dimbleby tonight about the addition of the third question on the referendum. And apparently the vote is in 2014 to avoid the Commonwealth Games Quote
caledonia Posted January 12, 2012 Report Posted January 12, 2012 I'll vote for independence no matter what - I know it's for the best. Same here The only fact I need to tell me its good for Scotland is that down south they don't want it. Cameron is a bit of a hypocrite saying together we are stronger pity he did not take that approach with Europe The SNP might have trouble getting other party supporters to agree and not just to follow their fav party line They might have a huge fight against the press and TV also as i would presume the press etc would campaign for a no vote Quote
dave_min Posted January 12, 2012 Report Posted January 12, 2012 And apparently the vote is in 2014 to avoid the Commonwealth Games Take it you're ignoring the fact she said it was gonna be in Autumn to avoid the Commonwealth Games? Quote
Kowalski Posted January 13, 2012 Author Report Posted January 13, 2012 Take it you're ignoring the fact she said it was gonna be in Autumn to avoid the Commonwealth Games? Why not have it in 2013? Quote
BigAl Posted January 13, 2012 Report Posted January 13, 2012 Why not have it in 2013? Why not 2012 Actually on second thoughts, we all know the answer to that Quote
Tyrant Posted January 13, 2012 Report Posted January 13, 2012 Why not 2012 Actually on second thoughts, we all know the answer to that Aye. Euros are on. Quote
mizer Posted January 13, 2012 Report Posted January 13, 2012 Why not 2012 Actually on second thoughts, we all know the answer to that Yes 2014 should be more favourable for the vote, but you cant rush ahead with no answers and dont forget the UK supreme court will be telling us that the vote cant go ahead which will take 6 months at least. The people of Scotland have been fed lies mainly by Scottish labour for years to stop them thinking anything but Scotland in the UK would see us returning to living in cranogs and having to go out and catch a haggis for breakfast on a baron wasteland of a country. People such as Wendy Alexander, Henry McLeish, George Foulks (real jambos scum) etc etc have all said that Scotland could not stand on its two feet. It has only been in recent years that they have been forced to admit we would be fine as an independent country. Quote
mizer Posted January 13, 2012 Report Posted January 13, 2012 Nicola Sturgeon is a terrible advert for the SNP. Taken to the cleaners by Paddy Ashdown and David Dimbleby tonight about the addition of the third question on the referendum. And apparently the vote is in 2014 to avoid the Commonwealth Games Aye she made a total tit up of that, the actual reason is that the European elections are then. Dont know why there is only two times a year we can have elections though. Quote
Tyrant Posted January 13, 2012 Report Posted January 13, 2012 Ach. I'm fucked if I know. I'm glad I've got two and a half years to think about it. Quote
dave_min Posted January 13, 2012 Report Posted January 13, 2012 Why not have it in 2013? Why rush it? Quote
Dandy_Don Posted January 13, 2012 Report Posted January 13, 2012 Presumably the debt would be a proportion of the UK debt either equivalent to our population or to the proportion of "assets" an Independent Scotland would secede from the UK. The issue is that the referendum won't really be on this. The SNP can suggest what debt they would hope for but it will then come down to lengthy negotiations so could be anything. Similarly the Military, Overseas Territories, Oil, Embassies etc Royal Family - SNP have said, just like Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Jamiaca etc we would retain the Monarchy. I would hope who ever gets voted in as a Government after Independence would quickly have a referendum on ditching the leaching cunts and become a Republic, but that is not currently anyones policy Military - Salmond seems to be tip toeing around this with all this devo-max bollocks. My understanding is that Scotland would retain a small standing army that would still be quite closely linked with the English/Welsh/NI army but we would obviously decide if we sent our soldiers into illegal wars or not. Trident would either be given to England/Wales/NI or allowed to stay in the short term for a big wad of cash Sterling/Euro - SNP have stated we would keep Sterling in the short to medium term, can't see we would do anything else. Ultimately it may be beneficial to be in the Euro or have our own currency like Norway but that decision could be a generation off given the current state of the euro. So Pound Sterling for the foreseeable. Embassies - I think the Scottish Govt already have "missions" in a number of EU countries and the US. We wouldn't need an Embassies in every country, few countries do. North Sea Oil - Would be a fight over this but is International Law not quite clear on which bit of water "should" belong to whom? At the moment I believe a proportion of the North Sea is under Scots Law rather than English Law. Presumably this corresponds to "Scottish Waters" so would be quite easy to work out. I'd always sat on the fence but am increasingly of the opinion why not. Financially I suspect some years as a Nation we'll be a bit better off, some years a bit worse off, but don't believe that we'll be a land of milk and honey but then equally the idea that Scotland uniquely in the World couldn't exist and would fall to pieces just by declaring Independence seems farcical. For me it's probably more about self determination and the ability to make decisions most other countries can. Also I am increasingly tired and resentful of living in a country that is seemingly run for the benefit of international financial institutions, while operating under the misapprehension that we have a divine right to tell the rest of the world what to do while sending our bloated armed forces around the world to enforce our will. The biggest worry for the establishment will not be who gets the oil but whether England/Wales/NI could hold onto their UN veto and seat on the Security Council and their EU veto and benefits. I couldn't give a fuck about that and would be more comfortable in a Scotland who operated within its level of influence and worked co-operatively with our European and Scandinavian neighbours rather than like a boorish anachronistic imperialistic monarchistic state I've always wondered about how the UN would come out of this - if we split up, would the UK lose their seat on the Security Cooncil? Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 15, 2012 Report Posted January 15, 2012 I don't know the answer to this. I suppose there is precedence with this given Russia took over the USSR's veto and security council seat. Given that one key advantage of being in the union is our international clout, which seems to be important to a lot of folk, so surprised it isn't discussed more Quote
maverick sheep Posted January 15, 2012 Report Posted January 15, 2012 I don't know the answer to this. I suppose there is precedence with this given Russia took over the USSR's veto and security council seat. Given that one key advantage of being in the union is our international clout, which seems to be important to a lot of folk, so surprised it isn't discussed more Would imagine we'd be elected as non-permanent members fairly quickly, while UK (what's left of it) retains permanent membership. Why France or the UK are permanent members at all is another issue. Germany fror eg are not. Quote
Stewart Posted January 15, 2012 Report Posted January 15, 2012 Edited for you so the video works. Quote
manc_don Posted January 15, 2012 Report Posted January 15, 2012 Edited for you so the video works. Cheers, I didn't realise Quote
Stewart Posted January 15, 2012 Report Posted January 15, 2012 Aye it's when you put up the mobile link it just goes to the YouTube home page. Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 18, 2012 Report Posted January 18, 2012 Following the weekend polling on Scottish Independence, there is a new YouGov poll of Scotland for Channel 4 news out today. Topline voting intention figures show the SNP continuing to hold a healthy lead in Holyrood voting intentions and now also ahead of Labour in Westminster voting intentions. Westminster: CON 16%, LAB 35%, LDEM 7%, SNP 37% Holyrood constituency: CON 13%, LAB 32%, LDEM 7%, SNP 44% Holyrood regional: CON 13%, LAB 31%, LDEM 7%, SNP 39%, Grn 5% On the referendum, there is an pretty even split on whether it should be a straight in-out question (43%) or a three way referendum (46%). On the timings, 38% would like it this year or next, 33% would like it delayed until 2014. Finally, on actual voting intention in a referendum, on “devo-max” 58% of those who gave an answer said they would vote in favour, 42% said they would vote against. On full independence, 39% said they would vote in favour, 61% said they would vote against. The survey asked the questions as mock-ballot papers, which as ballot papers tend not to have abstain or don’t know boxes, means it gets answers from the vast majority of people. If you instead take only those who said they were 10/10 certain to vote it shifts things slightly in favour of extra devolution or independence, with respondents backing devo-max by 60-40 and opposing Scottish independence by 41-59. Quote
Goldie03 Posted January 18, 2012 Report Posted January 18, 2012 Is 2014 not to co-incide with the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn?! We can't magic up our own currency - that would just be riddiculous. No one will vote yes if it means joining the euro so we would have to stick with sterling. Bank of Scotland, RBOS and the Clydesdale all have all have a licence to print scottish notes but given that Bos is owned by Lloyds and the Clydesdale is a subsidiary of the National Australia Bank it might get complicated. Of course 16 & 17 year olds should get to vote. They are the ones who will be living and working in an independent Scotland in 50 years I have absolutely no idea what I would vote which is exactly why the referendum needs to be 2 years away so I can figure it out Quote
Edinburghdon Posted January 18, 2012 Report Posted January 18, 2012 We can't magic up our own currency - that would just be riddiculous. No one will vote yes if it means joining the euro so we would have to stick with sterling. Bank of Scotland, RBOS and the Clydesdale all have all have a licence to print scottish notes but given that Bos is owned by Lloyds and the Clydesdale is a subsidiary of the National Australia Bank it might get complicated. Well if it's left to the banks then it's bound to turn out to be a fuck up! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.