Scotland an Independent nation

Scotland an Independent nation

As you know Scotland wants independence for a long time


Link to above video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDm4S5CyJmc

The independence of Scotland brings with it a whole lot of issues. Who will own the North refineries? Will the UK have to "share" the army with Scotland? How about health care? Also, how about the citizens? Will trains have to "stop" at Scotland border to have the visa status of the passengers checked?

Originally posted by wikipedian:

As you know Scotland wants independence for a long time

Not true.

What is true, however, is that people who vacation in Mallorca should be banned!
http://www.wunderground.com/global/stations/08306.html

Disgusting! We're hovering around freezing weather and a frigid rain is falling. Grand Rapids is not the Mallorca of the mid-west.

Nice try Jaybro.......

Anyway following you disappointing sojourn in the Florida swamps you felt drawn back to Michigan which has as much chance of leaving the Union as we here. Torn between too much sunshine and too much snow - shame! Robert Bruce was the boy and how he trounced the opposition is worthy of a film instead of that Braveheart cartoon and that woeful accent. At least Bruce won in the end. In 1707 we here were as poor as the citizens of Detroit due to the failure of the Darien Scheme colony. Thanks for the wonderful historical background. Even beats Walt Disney?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Nice try Jaybro.......

Anyway following you disappointing sojourn in the Florida swamps you felt drawn back to Michigan which has as much chance of leaving the Union as we here. Torn between too much sunshine and too much snow - shame!

Leaving the Union?

Mild winter, here. Little snow, too much rain. The winds are howling at the moment.

I returned to Michigan for family reasons...grand babies.

You do try with the big spoon and will give you full cred for that - nae worries. We get a lot more rain than our English cousins who are in a number of places having water shortage problems. We wouldn't see them stuck of course. Glad you have nice bairns awa' up there laddie. Was a very nice and ever so lovable wee yin masel ye ken? Just goes to show that great babies are not confined to Michigan.

My concern is that Scotland wants the good without the bad, the truth is that Scotland would be bankrupt with out England - it wouldn't have been able to bail out RBS...moreover, it's unlikely it would have had the "North Oil Fields" as on its own it doesn't have the military might to back up its claim.

I do, however, feel that Scotland should have the right to decide - for better or worse. I personally, feel that both Scotland and England are better together than apart.

Too true.

North Sea oil has been declining.and the Scottish Nose Pickers (SNP -get it?) would keep the Pound and link to the Bank of england. Such independence! They are also sympathetic to the Euro which the bulk of people aren't. Then there are tax matters, licencing, pensions and much more to cause problems. Immigration is another. The UK is trying to curb the over immigration whilst Salmond wants more up here! When the Home Secretary raised this the Nats sneered. If you challenge them on anything you get sneers or rubbished. There are people here who like to wail that dismal 'Flower of Scotland' dirge and dream of granny's Heilan' Hame and would be great extras for a rehash of Brigadoon. As the PM recently said you can be proud of being Scots and in Britain and even feel more so in that direction without galloping off into the unknown. I will trust that the people here will use common sense and remember that the SNP might have the majority in the Scots Parliament but they don't get very far up here in the National Elections which kind of says something.

If that arrogant, smart Alec, Salmond was knocked down tomorrow by a bus the SNP would be like a chicken with no head. He needs to be taken to heel and instead of ignoring points raised and trying to give the impression the Saltire is theirs and opponents are lesser Scots, put in his place. Too full of his importance by far.

Originally posted by danoffer:

My concern is that Scotland wants the good without the bad, the truth is that Scotland would be bankrupt with out England - it wouldn't have been able to bail out RBS...moreover, it's unlikely it would have had the "North Oil Fields" as on its own it doesn't have the military might to back up its claim.I do, however, feel that Scotland should have the right to decide - for better or worse. I personally, feel that both Scotland and England are better together than apart.

It could equally be argued (and has been) that England would be bankrupt without Scottish oil and engineering. Certainly, not all parts of the UK were equally vulnerable to the economic decisions made mostly in London
Unfortunately, that butterfly has already flapped it's wings, and all we can do is look at where we are now.

I don't see that splitting makes economic or social sense.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

If you challenge them on anything you get sneers or rubbished.

How do you mean? Sort of like this....?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

and the Scottish Nose Pickers

Originally posted by rjhowie:

If that arrogant, smart Alec, Salmond

Originally posted by rjhowie:

He needs to be taken to heel

etc...

What is exactly the official status of Scotland inside England? Is it a kind of autonomic region? just a province?

Originally posted by Belfrager:

What is exactly the official status of Scotland inside England? Is it a kind of autonomic region? just a province?

It's a country, but not a sovereign state. It has a separate legal system, and partial self-government, i.e. certain areas fall under the jurisdiction of the Scottish Parliament, and others fall to Westminster.

Scotland has no status inside England. It's not inside England, it's a part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, alongside England.

No England wouldn't be "bankrupt at all. A kind of over simplification. With the Barnet Formula, Scotland has done well out of that. It certainly doesn't make economic or social sense. And the SNP still answers any challenge by saying "rubbish" rather than contesting the matter. Theresa May did have a point on immigration and like all the previous questions ducked by Salmond and his frantic mob. Even trying to brain the population by using the Commonwealth Games and the 700th Bannockburn celebration as tools I don't think will work. Oh certainly the more emotional of my countrymen will get lumps in the throat rather than a dose of realism and common sense but I do think Salmond will lose.

Scotland is not a Province or region of England Belfrager and will make allowances for your lack of knowledge. Many here would instantly be offended by that (including Scottish Unionists) but I accept your historical ignoarance. England and Scotland were and are countries in their own right. The King of Scotland being related by birth to the King of England led to him becoming monarch of a joint Kingdom in the 17the century. However two seperate parliaments and currecnies existed until 1707 when the 2 parliaments were joined together hence the title at the time, Great Britain. Like Ireland and Wales there was a strong Celtic tradition like in parts of France. England came generally from an Angle-Saxon, Norman tradition. In 1901 the Irish Parliament was dissolved and incorporated into the national flag. This alreaty had the St George of England red cross and the saltire blue cross of Scotland. This meant the addition of the red saltire cross of Ireland required to be on it too. Hope this helps?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Hope this helps?

Certainly. What I thought, Scotland considers itself too much weak to become a sovereign State... and the good news are that you are absolutely right

( ... )

Don't have a problem with that understanding at all actually (!).

It's an emotional thing that the SNP First Minister is milking all he can get. But the rational, sigh. Usually the Nationalists can draw on around the mid-twenties and at a stretch into the low thirties in polls. That tends to be their limit. Should they lose the Referendum they are delaying they will come up with all sorts of cobblers to show they were successful. Their constant refusal to be drawn into details of the idea with cries of rubbish and haughty brush-offs along with hinting you aren't real Scots if not in their camp are stupid. Typical of many Scots are those who for example want a break from the too long Labour administration in Glasgow and due to that party having internal fights, resignations and now a brekaway Party that may well be expected to happen. The Nats will take the City Council but from my discussions with those who might shift their vote it is because of the ham-fisted Labour lot. But when you ask them do they want and Independent Scotland "Oh, no." As for me, I am not a Labour supporter but those folk do have a point. The Scottish Labour leader refuses to share a platform with the Scots Conservative & Unionists but will with the Liberal Democrats. Now that is just plain stupid and shows that lot up. The three parties are all Unionists and against the SNP so the Labour lot have learned nothing.

However it strikes me that the very arrogance that the SNP has cried about Labour run Councils and such that they are very much into the same vogue themselves! It just hasn't struck the general population yet.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

Certainly. What I thought, Scotland considers itself too much weak to become a sovereign State... and the good news are that you are absolutely right

Nonsense. If it wasn't strong enough to be a sovereign state, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. The question is whether we actually want to be.

The situation is analogous with the European Union. Each country is identified separately, but they have decided to share decision-making and abide by the decisions of the group. The nationalists think that London, by dint of its dense population, has too much control over the affairs of people further away, who have different needs. Which is a fair assessment, but I think there's better solutions than taking the ball and going home.

I wouldn't count on Scotland being too weak. If they ever do take it into their heads to be independent of England, they'll be able to stand in their own right. The only reason they're not separated is because too many Scots and too many English have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are now.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

I wouldn't count on Scotland being too weak. If they ever do take it into their heads to be independent of England, they'll be able to stand in their own right.

Be independent of England is an impossibility to Scotland. Being independent of the United Kingdom is the only possible independence that they can have. The day they are stronger than England.

Same goes for Wales, being Northern Ireland an occupied part of the Republic of Ireland, in my perspective.

Well Americans are the experts in vested interest mjsmsprt40 but you forget that in Uk Parliamentaqry Elections the Nationalists only get a single vifure number of MP's at Westminister. So the votes of the ordinary disprove your assumption on interests influenced by your own local experience.

May I point out Befrager that Wales only voted to have a local Assembly by 1% And again no great representation from Plaid Cymru the Welsh Nationalists in Parliament by the Welsh. As for Ulster/Northern Ireland this shows yet anfurther misudnderstanding of your knowledge of the make-up of Britain. N. Ireland has NEVER been part of the Irish Republic. When part of Ireland broke away(26 Counties) the Province of Ulster made it clear it wanted no part in this and a million people signed a petition 100 years ago to that effect. Southern Ireland wasn't even a Republic it was a "Free State" and remainded so until the late 1940's when it broke further ties when that half Spanish half Irish Nationalist nit De Valera became President. So Get your facts right before you make wild assumptions on limited understanding. Ireland was one country until '22 and British. The biggest part broke away and to say those that stayed in Britain are invaded is daft. Indeed there has been move to prove the majority of the population in the North want to do anything but remain part of Britain. Some nit-pickers say that the name Ulster doesn't count now as 3 Counties were put into the South at the break-up. That is equally dooty. After all we could say the very same about the rest being called "Ireland" and should be Southern Ireland on that basis!

Maybe Scotland could go it alone but it is the state it would be in that is more concerning. Most Scots don't want the Euro. How can you be independent if you keep the pound atnd your currency linked to the Bank of England? It is a case of Nationalists wanting their cake and eat it. And yet again I have to repeat that the Nationalists cannot even get double figures these days in the UK Parliament. Some Scots may be content to have them as an alternative to Labour as the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are well behind. Howebere if there was such a great move for independence we would see it nationally and we are not.