Will an independant Scotland be part of NATO, UN treatise. Have a Military?

originally posted by: flammadraco

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: flammadraco

his too may be a wake up call for the English people.

It most certainly is a wake up call to us in the South, especially when the three main party leaders are now pondering to the undecided be offering more power and money for a NO vote. Which will come directly from the English and the Welsh pockets with Wales loosing some £300 million per annum to subsidise these promises made by these leaders.

I say let them Stew in their own swill!

We should give them absolutely nothing and I will be voting against all three of the main parties based upon the fact that they even bothered to offer this.

We should Stand Firm and not budge one iota.

Korg.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Soloprotocol

It's all Salmond's got.

Scotland isn't harbouring some pot of gold somewhere, it isn't getting finances from anywhere else. If Scotland left the UK, the UK would leave Scotland and that's a big gap.

Really. This Reports says it is..
What Westminster and the Media are hiding from Everyone...I wonder why that is.??

Increased oil investment in Scotland’s Atlantic waters has led to a growth in the strength of Scotland’s oil and gas sector. In recent months reports have focus on the new Clair Ridge field, a massive £4.5 billion oil investment project. A new industry report goes even further and estimates that these recent investments represent only a fraction of a 100 year oil boom for Scotland’s Atlantic Margin.

Scotland set for a 100 year Oil boom west of Shetland

Alba Gu Brath

a reply to: Korg Trinity

I absolutely concur, I was hoping for a NO vote, but changed my mind in the last few days as the anti English rhetoric has been nauseating. The lack of understanding the basic facts about what independence will bring to Scotland is astonishing.

Even if the NO vote wins on Thursday, we will go through this all again within a decade, why should we put our financial markets in turmoil every time the likes of Salmond want to leave the union. Personally, I will be voting for the "English Democrat Party" at the next election (English equivalent to SNP) and I hope the English get a vote to leave the Union then Westminster can transfer to Holyrood.

reply to Soloprotocol

Scotland set for a 100 year Oil boom west of Shetland

You really are not getting your facts straight whatsoever. Shetland has an opt out clause. If Scotland vote Yes on Thursday, Shetland can decide to remain part of the UK, that would bugger up your "Shetland Oil Boom" for the next hundred years as it would be within UK waters and nothing to do with the Scottish.

originally posted by: Korg Trinity

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: Korg Trinity
Will An Independent be part of Nato with it's own Military?

Hahahaha Not a chance.... if they go independent they won't be able to afford the clothes on their backs let alone support a military of their own.

Scotland..... for a country with so much history... it sure seems they are devoid of the wise!

Korg.

48 hours of oil left for you...Tick Tock, Tick Tock.

Oh that old nutshell..

So the Scottish think they have leverage over us with oil price? Is that it??

Firstly and fore-mostly Scotland DOES NOT OWN the oil in the North Sea..... Secondly the only revenue Scotland sees of this is in tax revenue for the pipeline.

Guess the pipeline will be extended south of the boarder and hey presto... no more Tax revenue for Scotland!



Korg.

So Westminster plans on Stealing it from us?...Your lot better build another 5 Carriers and have a fleet of warships and subs running from the Shetlands all the way over the border.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: Korg Trinity

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: Korg Trinity
Will An Independent be part of Nato with it's own Military?

Hahahaha Not a chance.... if they go independent they won't be able to afford the clothes on their backs let alone support a military of their own.

Scotland..... for a country with so much history... it sure seems they are devoid of the wise!

Korg.

48 hours of oil left for you...Tick Tock, Tick Tock.

Oh that old nutshell..

So the Scottish think they have leverage over us with oil price? Is that it??

Firstly and fore-mostly Scotland DOES NOT OWN the oil in the North Sea..... Secondly the only revenue Scotland sees of this is in tax revenue for the pipeline.

Guess the pipeline will be extended south of the boarder and hey presto... no more Tax revenue for Scotland!



Korg.

So Westminster plans on Stealing it from us?...Your lot better build another 5 Carriers and have a fleet of warships and subs running from the Shetlands all the way over the border.

LOL, you getting your knickers in a twist because someone has given you facts?

We probably will have a military presence in the Shetland Isles if they decide they want to remain part of the UK, probably be a bit like Falklands, with the UK having to defend the islanders decision to remain away from Scotland.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Soloprotocol, please stop ignoring my posts (page 2) and regarding oil (other thread). I noticed you raised the 'oil issue' on this thread aswell. Will I explain the situation here aswell?

a reply to: flammadraco

There should be a clause banning the possibility of another referendum for at least 50 years as it has already cost too much.

The UK is just that. Any devolution should have had clauses preventing it from creating turmoil. Either in or out. A union requires stability for it to work.

It isn't a surprise that the referendum is on the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn, it is all about messing things up for the UK and about hating England and Westminster, despite it's many Scottish politicians.

www.theguardian.com...

Within minutes of a declaration in London that any attempt to hold a referendum on Scotland's future without the blessing of Westminster would be unlawful, the Scottish first minister unveiled plans to stage his independence poll in the autumn of 2014, the year of the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn.

Moore said the UK government's law officers, including the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, had ruled that under the Scotland Act 1998, Holyrood was explicitly barred from passing any measure which affected the UK's constitutional position. If Salmond tried to stage a referendum, the UK government or private citizens could move to have it struck down in the supreme court as unlawful.

Moore used his statement to confirm David Cameron's announcement on Sunday that the UK government will grant Holyrood the legal authority on a temporary basis to hold a legally binding referendum. But an order under section 30 of the Scotland Act granting this power will only be met if Salmond agrees to two conditions for the referendum:

• Voters would be restricted to deciding whether Scotland should remain, or leave, the UK. This is designed to stop Salmond's attempt to inch towards independence by offering voters a third option known as "devo max". This is full-blown devolution that falls short of independence.

• The vote would have to be staged by a set date. This was not named in the consultation document published on Tuesday. But the UK cabinet believes that the poll should be held by the end of 2013.

Moore's document made clear that the UK government was prepared to stage its own referendum in Scotland if the SNP spurns the opportunity to stage a vote based on legislation passed in Holyrood under the temporary powers granted by London. "A bill to provide for a referendum could either be a standalone bill, introduced solely to deliver a referendum, or provisions could be included as part of a wider bill," the document said.

i heard on the news the other day that around 10% of the british army are scottish regiments

but i would much prefer we stayed together work something out

you no the saying united we stand divided we fall.


a reply to: DJW001

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

There should be a call for another referendum, one run fairly without the media bias, fear mongering and lies. Who knows, perhaps it will be a landslide for the yes campaign. It certainly would have been without all that.

originally posted by: midicon
fear mongering and lies.

I heard that following the referendum they are revising the Oxford Dictionary to detail the following -
Fear/Scaremongering - Denial. Refusal to accept and/or believe detailed facts.

a reply to: midicon

Better take Salmond and the SNP out of the equation then!

a reply to: theabsolutetruth
The SNP were voted in by the people of Scotland with a mandate for a independence referendum...when should the SNP hold the Referendum?...When they are not in power,?
At least The SNP are sticking to what they promised in the Mandate unlike what the Tories, Labour etc do...Promise you everything then give you nothing.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Shetland doesn't like Scotland, it has more affinity to Norway and also prefers rule by Westminster and has a vote to keep part of the UK, which it probably would, given that it isn't full of idiots.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Their residents have traditionally been extremely hostile to Scottish independence and preferred Westminster government to that from Holyrood. They were part of Norway, not Scotland, until the late 15th century.

The paper, written by Mr Scott and Liam McArthur, his Orkney counterpart, said the islands “have always been and remain sceptical of Scottish central belt rule”.

The risk posed by the referendum is that the wishes of around 42,500 Shetlanders and Orcadians are drowned out by the millions of people living in and around Glasgow and Edinburgh, it argued.

Among their options is to seek “enhanced powers or independence from Scotland if Scotland were to vote for independence but the northern isles voted no,” it said, citing the SNP’s previous support for self-determination.
Another is to give the islanders “enhanced constitutional and tax status” within the UK, along the lines of the Faroes, a self-governing dependency of Denmark

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: midicon

Better take Salmond and the SNP out of the equation then!

We have Labour MP's, Green party MP's, Socialists MP's, Independent MP's, etc etc all for independence...it's not just the SNP that are pushing this forward, but i understand why you wouldn't know much about this particular fact... pro Union Media Bias in bed with Westminster.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

You seem to Cherry Pick the posts you want to respond to, why is that, questions or points being made are to hard to refute?

What will an Independent Scotland do if the Shetland Islands want to remain part of the UK which is a possibility? Where will all your oil revenue come from then?

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Shetland doesn't like Scotland, it has more affinity to Norway and also prefers rule by Westminster and has a vote to keep part of the UK, which it probably would, given that it isn't full of idiots.

Lol...What a stupid thing to say.

a reply to: Soloprotocol


Salmond is a snake oil salesman. if they cannot answer basic questions of the utmost importance then you should see that your accusations against Westminster are more apt against Salmond.

As for promising everything and giving nothing, think about how ridiculous the Scottish parliament overspend went and how much each new 'law' costs you and the rest of the UK.

I wouldn't let those accountants work the till in a cafe let alone run a national budget.

www.scotsman.com...

Holyrood in £500m overspend

THE true cost of laws passed by the Scottish Parliament since devolution is more than £500m higher than ministers have admitted and is growing by almost £200m a year.

Recently-released figures show the 100 acts introduced at Holyrood since 1999 have cost the nation around 570m more than the official estimate.

The figure represents more than 100 for every man, woman and child in the country and is considerably more than the notoriously underestimated cost of the parliament building itself.

The revelations led last night to calls for excessively-costly legislation to be torn up and for ministers to give greater thought to the cost of new laws before proceeding.

The true cost of devolution was unveiled by Conservative MSP Derek Brownlee, who asked the Executive for details on how much each new piece of legislation was costing. The figures show that in 2005-6 alone, the true cost of Scottish Parliament laws was almost 982m, around 177m more than ministers had estimated.

originally posted by: Xeven
Will an independant Scotland be part of NATO, UN, EU and other treatise. Have a Military? Queen, NATO and EU won't be Obliged to provide them defense or anything really.

Scary world to jump out into all alone.

Nope, they'd have to reapply to NATO, and to the EU. And the latter would be a hell of a lot harder than Wee Alex has been promising people. The reason: Belgium and Spain will veto their application the moment it happens. If Scotland becomes independent then the Flemish will ask for their own vote. The Catalans already have their own unofficial vote and the Basques would ask for one as well.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Actually I am a realist and see many flaws in the current political system.

Throwing accusations because you don't like the facts is not clever.