606v2 Rugby Fans Scottish Independence Thread

[George Carlin]

First topic message reminder :

 v
Let me start this off, then. I have printed and read all literature which either side has published on this debate over the past 2 years (including the main policy papers from the SNP and from Better Together/UK Treasury and the Wee Blue Book).
 
If I had the chance, I would think hard about it, but ultimately I think that I would vote 'no'.
 
It seems to me, with my pea brain, that:
 
1. As a professional economist, Alex Salmond has had his entire political and professional life to make a waterproof financial case for an independent Scotland. Provided that there isn't something I've missed, I cannot see that he has done so. How can we still be fishing for answers to very fundemental questions so close to the actual voting date? Surely if it was the case that Scotland had a solid long term financial future, there would be a far greater volume of published consensus? If the financial case for independence cannot be clearly and verifiably made (without optimistic financial projects which strain credulity), then this is where this debate begins and ends for me. What do we tell our kids otherwise?
 
2. I entirely understand and appreciate that stepping into the unknown cannot in itself be a reason to say 'no'. You cannot have opportunity without risk. However, is anyone else disappointed with the quality of verifiable information that has been made available to us throughout this entire debate? Whilst I don't expect all answers to all questions, surely it is better to err on the side of caution until such time as policy can be firmly established.
 
If this was a trial, the verdict would be 'not proven'.
 
What I don't believe is if Scotland votes no, the chance to do so again would be lost forever. I think that we may see another vote on this topic within a generation (20 years) if a 'no' vote does not have a clear majority amongst Scottish people. I would be happy with that.
 
Discuss. For the love of feck, please be nice.

[Sin é]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

Indeed, which is why they won't and why they will respectively.  I don't buy for one second this notion that either side will act out of 'vengeful wrath' - as Fly often likes to say, both sides will act in their own best interests, and those are usually governed by practical economic realities

i agree. but threatening to walk away from debt if not given access to the pound (claiming a currency is an asset), is not very clever.

people remember dumb threats like that

oh the ironing ....

Time to call it. I think Scotland will Vote 'No'.

[AsLongAsBut100ofUs]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

Indeed, which is why they won't and why they will respectively.  I don't buy for one second this notion that either side will act out of 'vengeful wrath' - as Fly often likes to say, both sides will act in their own best interests, and those are usually governed by practical economic realities

i agree. but threatening to walk away from debt if not given access to the pound (claiming a currency is an asset), is not very clever.

people remember dumb threats like that

Indeed. Fortunately they also remember false promises: http://i4.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/article4265480.ece/alternates/s615b/1.jpg

[Sin é]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

So a subsequent border of hate and protest NO TRADE would be set up between England and Scotland?  Afterall, smiles would be infrequent amongst the Scots and the UK if the UK blatantly vetoed their EU membership (and ALL the tumult of displacement and anguish and fear and pain caused not just to Scottish concerns (business and people) but also to Scottish based English companies and English people who continued to work and live in Scotland.

You people who say there should be a Trade war of vetoes and closed borders just don't think of the consequences for England itself.  But perhaps if you had relatives who lived in Scotland, had careers in Scotland, or knew of specific English owned companies in Scotland, you'd realise its so much more complex than TRADE WAR/SANCTIONS/VETOES and CLOSED BORDERS the situation would be post a Yes vote.

Will the rUK still be in the EU to veto Scotland joining.

The EU will want Scotland because a) Oil & gas b) fishing c) environment d) to urine off England who wants to leave the EU!

[fa0019]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

So a subsequent border of hate and protest NO TRADE would be set up between England and Scotland?  Afterall, smiles would be infrequent amongst the Scots and the UK if the UK blatantly vetoed their EU membership (and ALL the tumult of displacement and anguish and fear and pain caused not just to Scottish concerns (business and people) but also to Scottish based English companies and English people who continued to work and live in Scotland.

You people who say there should be a Trade war of vetoes and closed borders just don't think of the consequences for England itself.  But perhaps if you had relatives who lived in Scotland, had careers in Scotland, or knew of specific English owned companies in Scotland, you'd realise its so much more complex than TRADE WAR/SANCTIONS/VETOES and CLOSED BORDERS the situation would be post a Yes vote.

Exactly Fly

We would lose heavily. Salmond knows this. Its a war we can't win.

Remember we're the one who has fired all the shots. All rUK has done is said that in their view monetary union is not compatible and therefore out of the question. Its not unreasonable. That's how foreign countries operate in the 21st century.

We're the ones saying we're going to dump our debt if we don't get our own way.

Didn't say their should be a trade war. No one wins.... but some people lose more than others and in all outcomes, we would lose much more than rUK. But to suggest that we hold all the cards or even more than one. We have one ace card, maybe 2 with Trident.

rUK hold about 10 ace cards.

[RuggerRadge2611]

We do remember false promises.

A fairer Scotland has been promised.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/8197370.stm

Is this the fairer Scotland we can expect? A convicted murderer, convicted fairly in a Scottish court being released to a hero's welcome from a Tyrant in Libya?

or this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7700074.stm

The SNP just ignoring planning laws in Scotland and the concerns of local residents to build a millionaire's golf palace.

I keep hearing if we are better together, why aren't we better together now.

I counter it with if we will have a fairer Scotland, why don't we have a fairer Scotland now?

[fa0019]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

So a subsequent border of hate and protest NO TRADE would be set up between England and Scotland?  Afterall, smiles would be infrequent amongst the Scots and the UK if the UK blatantly vetoed their EU membership (and ALL the tumult of displacement and anguish and fear and pain caused not just to Scottish concerns (business and people) but also to Scottish based English companies and English people who continued to work and live in Scotland.

You people who say there should be a Trade war of vetoes and closed borders just don't think of the consequences for England itself.  But perhaps if you had relatives who lived in Scotland, had careers in Scotland, or knew of specific English owned companies in Scotland, you'd realise its so much more complex than TRADE WAR/SANCTIONS/VETOES and CLOSED BORDERS the situation would be post a Yes vote.

Will the rUK still be in the EU to veto Scotland joining.

The EU will want Scotland because a) Oil & gas  b) fishing c) environment  d) to urine off England who wants to leave the EU!

I doubt they will actually leave.  The EU has many good points and its a power going forward  into the 21st century. Like Scotland now... deep down we know that we can't have our cake and eat it. Leaving the EU would be the wrong decision. By 2050 anyhow if the UK stays together it will be the biggest nation and the biggest economy according to most projections so our position in the EU will grow and I imagine the Franco-German alliance will drift as the UK becomes more and more powerful.

[Jimpy]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

[SecretFly]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

So a subsequent border of hate and protest NO TRADE would be set up between England and Scotland?  Afterall, smiles would be infrequent amongst the Scots and the UK if the UK blatantly vetoed their EU membership (and ALL the tumult of displacement and anguish and fear and pain caused not just to Scottish concerns (business and people) but also to Scottish based English companies and English people who continued to work and live in Scotland.

You people who say there should be a Trade war of vetoes and closed borders just don't think of the consequences for England itself.  But perhaps if you had relatives who lived in Scotland, had careers in Scotland, or knew of specific English owned companies in Scotland, you'd realise its so much more complex than TRADE WAR/SANCTIONS/VETOES and CLOSED BORDERS the situation would be post a Yes vote.

Exactly Fly

We would lose heavily. Salmond knows this. Its a war we can't win.

Remember we're the one who has fired all the shots. All rUK has done is said that in their view monetary union is not compatible and therefore out of the question. Its not unreasonable. That's how foreign countries operate in the 21st century.

We're the ones saying we're going to dump our debt if we don't get our own way.

Didn't say their should be a trade war. No one wins.... but some people lose more than others and in all outcomes, we would lose much more than rUK. But to suggest that we hold all the cards or even more than one. We have one ace card, maybe 2 with Trident.

rUK hold about 10 ace cards.

Again though, you're even turning what I say into a battleground for a potential future war..... you say things like "It's a war we can't win"; "we're the one who has fired the first shots" - "no one wins"

That's all war talk - and it engenders fear and fear alone before the need for it.  As ASBO says, I keep repeating that I'm not saying Scotland couldn't win a fight with a stubborn England - I'm saying it would NEVER be in the interests of England itself to be stubborn with a newly Independent Scotland - just as it would not be in the interests of Salmond to be an immovable rock in any negotiations either.

Some of you think about and constantly talk the Doomsday scenario.  Now for some, that's a requirement of being NO.  You must highlight the negatives of YES or else you're not a genuine NO.  So that part is understandable from both sides - both sides fear-monger the alternate view - that's an election - that's the dynamics of the democratic voting system.

BUT...some of you are talking yourselves into believing the propaganda coming from both sides, even though you all know or should know that the gloom of the alternate view is always part of any democratic election - that's the game played.

I say it won't be and wouldn't be in England's interests to alienate a new neighbour with strong family bonds and strong trade links by forcefully vetoing it either in EU terms or NATO etc. And neither would it be in Salmond's interests to tell England to "f**k off now" if he gets his YES vote.  Scotland need the relationship with England - a friendly productive one - and England need the same from Scotland. It's just true.  It can never be not true.

[quinsforever]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

Indeed, which is why they won't and why they will respectively.  I don't buy for one second this notion that either side will act out of 'vengeful wrath' - as Fly often likes to say, both sides will act in their own best interests, and those are usually governed by practical economic realities

i agree. but threatening to walk away from debt if not given access to the pound (claiming a currency is an asset), is not very clever.

people remember dumb threats like that

Indeed.  Fortunately they also remember false promises: http://i4.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/article4265480.ece/alternates/s615b/1.jpg

its not a false promise yet surely? they only made it a couple of days ago!

i found that it was a small subsidiary of betfair that was paying out on the NO vote, probably as much for the publicity as anything else. So there is still hope ASBO

[HammerofThunor]

oh the ironing ....

Time to call it. I think Scotland will Vote 'No'.

Was that deliberate or auto-correct? Either way it's awesome. That's now replaced "think of the children"

[AsLongAsBut100ofUs]

We do remember false promises.

A fairer Scotland has been promised.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/8197370.stm

Is this the fairer Scotland we can expect? A convicted murderer, convicted fairly in a Scottish court being released to a hero's welcome from a Tyrant in Libya?

or this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7700074.stm

The SNP just ignoring planning laws in Scotland and the concerns of local residents to build a millionaire's golf palace.

I keep hearing if we are better together, why aren't we better together now.

I counter it with if we will have a fairer Scotland, why don't we have a fairer Scotland now?

Interesting, Radge.

Possible one of the least safe convictions ever: http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499 - highly recommended read if you are genuinely interested in the disaster that happened over Lockerbie - I had a direct interest and have researched in great depth

A Labour-led council

We don't have a fairer Scotland now because we have no proper democratic representation and control less than 20% of our revenues

[AsLongAsBut100ofUs]

My final comment (and then I'm off this thread for good, I promise!! ): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ5MELbCnxI

May the most compelling argument win and either way we move on

[Irish Londoner]

With regard to NATO and EU membership in the world of realpolitik an iScotland would be given membership of both - even if it was some form of "associate" membership that had to be cobbled together to save face for Cameron.
NATO membership would be a given, firstly because of Scotlands strategic location to cover the sea around northern Europe, Scandinavia and the Atlantic to the west. Secondly, NATO is an expansionist organisation, it would be hard to reconcile wooing the former eastern bloc nations and ex-Soviet states to join with not allowing Scotland in. The US would have a complete hissy fit with rUK if Cameron did anything to block Scotland joining NATO, especially if they thought that it might lead Scotland to neutrality or even worse opening its ports to say Russian or Chinese military shipping.
EU would be the same - the idea of the EU wanting a comparatively wealthy country just offshore that it could not trade with is highly unlikely. Also a non-EU Scotland would have no obligation to keep the current EU migrants from the expansion countries - would Cameron want a scenario where floods of migrants legally entitled to live in the UK but not an iScotland started moving south just around the time of a General Election or possibly a vote on EU membership - manna from heaven to UKIP.

[RuggerRadge2611]

I'm done too, thanks for the debate. It has been enlightening. I'm now off on sea trial for the next 3 days till this whole thing blows over.

Don't do anything crazy till I get back

[Adam D]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

Living in Scotland, unfortunately I can see at ground level it is working.

The biggest success to this campaign has been Salmonds to motivate the general riff raff of society to don half blue painted faces and head to the ballot boxes.

This is not a snobbery or elitist comments but the most vocal of any supporters are generally the people you will find in wetherspoons at 11am most days and/or 18 year olds who want "freedom" without having any grasp of the real issues of the debate.

I don't mind how people vote as long as they do so on an informed basis.

Unfortunately, I think a large underbelly of society are doing it on a Bravehart mentality.

[quinsforever]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

So a subsequent border of hate and protest NO TRADE would be set up between England and Scotland?  Afterall, smiles would be infrequent amongst the Scots and the UK if the UK blatantly vetoed their EU membership (and ALL the tumult of displacement and anguish and fear and pain caused not just to Scottish concerns (business and people) but also to Scottish based English companies and English people who continued to work and live in Scotland.

You people who say there should be a Trade war of vetoes and closed borders just don't think of the consequences for England itself.  But perhaps if you had relatives who lived in Scotland, had careers in Scotland, or knew of specific English owned companies in Scotland, you'd realise its so much more complex than TRADE WAR/SANCTIONS/VETOES and CLOSED BORDERS the situation would be post a Yes vote.

Exactly Fly

We would lose heavily. Salmond knows this. Its a war we can't win.

Remember we're the one who has fired all the shots. All rUK has done is said that in their view monetary union is not compatible and therefore out of the question. Its not unreasonable. That's how foreign countries operate in the 21st century.

We're the ones saying we're going to dump our debt if we don't get our own way.

Didn't say their should be a trade war. No one wins.... but some people lose more than others and in all outcomes, we would lose much more than rUK. But to suggest that we hold all the cards or even more than one. We have one ace card, maybe 2 with Trident.

rUK hold about 10 ace cards.

Again though, you're even turning what I say into a battleground for a potential future war..... you say things like "It's a war we can't win"; "we're the one who has fired the first shots" - "no one wins"

That's all war talk - and it engenders fear and fear alone before the need for it.  As ASBO says, I keep repeating that I'm not saying Scotland couldn't win a fight with a stubborn England - I'm saying it would NEVER be in the interests of England itself to be stubborn with a newly Independent Scotland - just as it would not be in the interests of Salmond to be an immovable rock in any negotiations either.

Some of you think about and constantly talk the Doomsday scenario.  Now for some, that's a requirement of being NO.  You must highlight the negatives of YES or else you're not a genuine NO.  So that part is understandable from both sides - both sides fear-monger the alternate view - that's an election - that's the dynamics of the democratic voting system.

BUT...some of you are talking yourselves into believing the propaganda coming from both sides, even though you all know or should know that the gloom of the alternate view is always part of any democratic election - that's the game played.

I say it won't be and wouldn't be in England's interests to alienate a new neighbour with strong family bonds and strong trade links by forcefully vetoing it either in EU terms or NATO etc. And neither would it be in Salmond's interests to tell England to "f**k off now" if he gets his YES vote.  Scotland need the relationship with England - a friendly productive one - and England need the same from Scotland. It's just true.  It can never be not true.

FLY, the language from rUK has been neighbourly, grown-up and statesmanlike. The language from Salmond and the SNP particularly as regards currency, debt and the EU, has not. you are the only person proposing war.

if Scotland want sterling post-YES, no problem. But all their banks have to move to the UK or stop using leverage and rUK will set strict limits on Scots government spending, with financial penalties for failing to adhere. And they will have to pay a bill each year for use of the BoE and FCA as the cost to Scotalnd of setting up their own would be dramatic.

[SecretFly]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

A rational person might be disturbed by the idea that as the campaign begins to close, the MEDIA begin to cool the fires they selectively themselves stoked.  The MEDIA want heat in any topic and by God they've done their best to produce it in this debate.  But they're the ones playing the dangerous game.

I've heard all the reports about intimidation and people not being allowed to say what they wanted to say.  I've even heard a BBC female reporter say she witnessed people coming up to a NO campaigner and whispering that they'd vote 'NO' but felt pressured into voting YES by an aggressive YES camp campaign of intimidation..........???

Now an alert journalist might have looked at the logic of that one and considered that the people coming up to the NO campaigner might have been well placed set-ups, she might have considering everyone who votes on these islands does so behind a curtain! - no intimidation can work in practice and there was absolutely no way the person who 'feared' voting NO needed to fear voting NO - and should still do so!
But, the reporter still related the tale without once questioning the validity or logic of the incident.  Flame stoking.

But now, what did I see this morning on SKY?  An attempt to begin the process of putting water on the flames.  We got jovially told by two commentators that the passions were mild indeed overall - mostly just people shouting their views at each other and moving on, that the campaign never had a sinister tinge and that it was just the passions of a very good political campaign.

OH???  Is that all it was?  Why didn't you say all that during the last few weeks?  Nope, it didn't serve the media's purposes to talk down viciousness then, they had a campaign to win.  Now, they are like council road sweepers, ready to brush away the chip boxes and beer bottles of the night before so that normal people can get back to work.

[quinsforever]

With regard to NATO and EU membership in the world of realpolitik an iScotland would be given membership of both - even if it was some form of "associate" membership that had to be cobbled together to save face for Cameron.
NATO membership would be a given, firstly because of Scotlands strategic location to cover the sea around northern Europe, Scandinavia and the Atlantic to the west. Secondly, NATO is an expansionist organisation, it would be hard to reconcile wooing the former eastern bloc nations and ex-Soviet states to join with not allowing Scotland in. The US would have a complete hissy fit with rUK if Cameron did anything to block Scotland joining NATO, especially if they thought that it might lead Scotland to neutrality or even worse opening its ports to say Russian or Chinese military shipping.
EU would be the same - the idea of the EU wanting a comparatively wealthy country just offshore that it could not trade with is highly unlikely. Also a non-EU Scotland would have no obligation to keep the current EU migrants from the expansion countries - would Cameron want a scenario where floods of migrants legally entitled to live in the UK but not an iScotland started moving south just around the time of a General Election or possibly a vote on EU membership - manna from heaven to UKIP.

having EU workers in scotland is nothing to do with the EU. that's up to scotland post-YES. you dont need to be a member of the EU to employ EU citizens.

Scotland would have to negotiate all new bilateral trade and visa treaties with all countries including the EU and rUK though. But i dont think anything would be affected as no-one wants to affect trade or employment.

[fa0019]

We do remember false promises.

A fairer Scotland has been promised.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/8197370.stm

Is this the fairer Scotland we can expect? A convicted murderer, convicted fairly in a Scottish court being released to a hero's welcome from a Tyrant in Libya?

or this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7700074.stm

The SNP just ignoring planning laws in Scotland and the concerns of local residents to build a millionaire's golf palace.

I keep hearing if we are better together, why aren't we better together now.

I counter it with if we will have a fairer Scotland, why don't we have a fairer Scotland now?

That's the SNP to a tee.

They have never been a party of anything else bar independence. They will alter any stance to get the only thing that matters to them... if it meant taxing the poor, they would do it, if it meant taxing the rich, they would do it. If it means cosying up to Murdoch, Trump whoever it does not matter to them. Have

Once the result is in, its final, even if it was proved that everything they said was false and even memos were produced showing they knew it was wrong.... to them it would be a price worth paying as they would get what they want.... an independent Scotland at any cost.

[Jimpy]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

Living in Scotland, unfortunately I can see at ground level it is working.

The biggest success to this campaign has been Salmonds to motivate the general riff raff of society to don half blue painted faces and head to the ballot boxes.

This is not a snobbery or elitist comments but the most vocal of any supporters are generally the people you will find in wetherspoons at 11am most days and/or 18 year olds who want "freedom" without having any grasp of the real issues of the debate.

I don't mind how people vote as long as they do so on an informed basis.

Unfortunately, I think a large underbelly of society are doing it on a Bravehart mentality.

I think people voting yes for reasons such as wanting to be able to govern independantly, to cement their national identity, are doing so for the right reasons but unfortunately, what I don't think they realise is that a YES vote is opening the door wide to a particularly inflexible and distasteful brand of national-socialism that would grab the opportunity to gain greater power immediately.

[GLove39]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

Living in Scotland, unfortunately I can see at ground level it is working.

The biggest success to this campaign has been Salmonds to motivate the general riff raff of society to don half blue painted faces and head to the ballot boxes.

This is not a snobbery or elitist comments but the most vocal of any supporters are generally the people you will find in wetherspoons at 11am most days and/or 18 year olds who want "freedom" without having any grasp of the real issues of the debate.

I don't mind how people vote as long as they do so on an informed basis.

Unfortunately, I think a large underbelly of society are doing it on a Bravehart mentality.

That's about as accurate as describing everyone on the No side as an elitist millionaire or a member of the Orange Order.

[Jimpy]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

Living in Scotland, unfortunately I can see at ground level it is working.

The biggest success to this campaign has been Salmonds to motivate the general riff raff of society to don half blue painted faces and head to the ballot boxes.

This is not a snobbery or elitist comments but the most vocal of any supporters are generally the people you will find in wetherspoons at 11am most days and/or 18 year olds who want "freedom" without having any grasp of the real issues of the debate.

I don't mind how people vote as long as they do so on an informed basis.

Unfortunately, I think a large underbelly of society are doing it on a Bravehart mentality.

That's about as accurate as describing everyone on the No side as an elitist millionaire or a member of the Orange Order.

I know. I'm an elitist millionaire, and co-founder of the Salisbury Orange Order. I'm in Weatherspoons by 1030 latest most days.

[LordDowlais]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

So a subsequent border of hate and protest NO TRADE would be set up between England and Scotland?  Afterall, smiles would be infrequent amongst the Scots and the UK if the UK blatantly vetoed their EU membership (and ALL the tumult of displacement and anguish and fear and pain caused not just to Scottish concerns (business and people) but also to Scottish based English companies and English people who continued to work and live in Scotland.

You people who say there should be a Trade war of vetoes and closed borders just don't think of the consequences for England itself.  But perhaps if you had relatives who lived in Scotland, had careers in Scotland, or knew of specific English owned companies in Scotland, you'd realise its so much more complex than TRADE WAR/SANCTIONS/VETOES and CLOSED BORDERS the situation would be post a Yes vote.

Exactly Fly

We would lose heavily. Salmond knows this. Its a war we can't win.

Remember we're the one who has fired all the shots. All rUK has done is said that in their view monetary union is not compatible and therefore out of the question. Its not unreasonable. That's how foreign countries operate in the 21st century.

We're the ones saying we're going to dump our debt if we don't get our own way.

Didn't say their should be a trade war. No one wins.... but some people lose more than others and in all outcomes, we would lose much more than rUK. But to suggest that we hold all the cards or even more than one. We have one ace card, maybe 2 with Trident.

rUK hold about 10 ace cards.

Again though, you're even turning what I say into a battleground for a potential future war..... you say things like "It's a war we can't win"; "we're the one who has fired the first shots" - "no one wins"

That's all war talk - and it engenders fear and fear alone before the need for it.  As ASBO says, I keep repeating that I'm not saying Scotland couldn't win a fight with a stubborn England - I'm saying it would NEVER be in the interests of England itself to be stubborn with a newly Independent Scotland - just as it would not be in the interests of Salmond to be an immovable rock in any negotiations either.

Some of you think about and constantly talk the Doomsday scenario.  Now for some, that's a requirement of being NO.  You must highlight the negatives of YES or else you're not a genuine NO.  So that part is understandable from both sides - both sides fear-monger the alternate view - that's an election - that's the dynamics of the democratic voting system.

BUT...some of you are talking yourselves into believing the propaganda coming from both sides, even though you all know or should know that the gloom of the alternate view is always part of any democratic election - that's the game played.

I say it won't be and wouldn't be in England's interests to alienate a new neighbour with strong family bonds and strong trade links by forcefully vetoing it either in EU terms or NATO etc. And neither would it be in Salmond's interests to tell England to "f**k off now" if he gets his YES vote.  Scotland need the relationship with England - a friendly productive one - and England need the same from Scotland. It's just true.  It can never be not true.

I was trying to stay off this thread, but I have been drawn back in because of what has been posted here by secretfly, the negatives of the YES campaign are being talked about, but the YES campaign are ignoring them, David Dimbleby asked Alex Salmond the very questions last night, and he did not answer them, he just went on about Scottish history and Scottish people who have done things throughout history, not once did he give a plan for independency or answer the questions about currency or what they would do if he did not get everything he is asking for.

Scotland could make it as a country of their own, but it will be nowhere near what they are getting now, but he does not have to worry about this, he has no children or grandchildren to worry about, perhaps that's why he is trying to build this legacy, as his name will stop with him.

[fa0019]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

Living in Scotland, unfortunately I can see at ground level it is working.

The biggest success to this campaign has been Salmonds to motivate the general riff raff of society to don half blue painted faces and head to the ballot boxes.

This is not a snobbery or elitist comments but the most vocal of any supporters are generally the people you will find in wetherspoons at 11am most days and/or 18 year olds who want "freedom" without having any grasp of the real issues of the debate.

I don't mind how people vote as long as they do so on an informed basis.

Unfortunately, I think a large underbelly of society are doing it on a Bravehart mentality.

That's about as accurate as describing everyone on the No side as an elitist millionaire or a member of the Orange Order.

I agree but the Yes voters or at least fair number of them have been very aggressive towards anyone, anything who stands back and says.. hang on a minute.

How Douglas Alexander could be booed for when talking about his mum who worked in the NHS for 40 years is deplorable. A job half these people have turned their nose up at because it doesn't pay enough, is too hard.

The NUJ have complained about the behaviour of one group in particular and how their members have been collectively harassed. The whole BBC bias protest at what... them asking him questions which he cannot answer. Who is he Putin?

Just look at how Salmond has been found out for bullying anyone who has a differing opinion like the rector of St. Andrews. Then he tried to insist on her changing her view and her comments through aggression alone.

Its a behaviour which has filtered from the top down I'm afraid.

[LordDowlais]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

Living in Scotland, unfortunately I can see at ground level it is working.

The biggest success to this campaign has been Salmonds to motivate the general riff raff of society to don half blue painted faces and head to the ballot boxes.

This is not a snobbery or elitist comments but the most vocal of any supporters are generally the people you will find in wetherspoons at 11am most days and/or 18 year olds who want "freedom" without having any grasp of the real issues of the debate.

I don't mind how people vote as long as they do so on an informed basis.

Unfortunately, I think a large underbelly of society are doing it on a Bravehart mentality.

Agree 100% and this why I have kept on about how the Scottish public deserve to know the truth of what will happen should they become independent, Salmod has never answered this, there are no plans, David Dimbleby made him look like a pleb last night, he is just beating everybody who will listen into a fever pitched army of patriots, yes we can win this FREEDOM. But he is not telling the average everyday Scottish person how hard it will be, rough seas ahead, and a standard of living way below of what you are used to, but of course he doesn't want people to realise this does he ?

[SecretFly]

you are the only person proposing war.

?  Laughable and pretty contemptible in equal measure.  If you see everything I've written on this topic to date, and view it as a proposal for war, then it really is clear why you're having difficulty with the language used in this debate.

[quinsforever]

you are the only person proposing war.

?  Laughable and pretty contemptible in equal measure.  If you see everytrhing I've written on this topic to date, and view it as a proposal for war, then it really is clear why you're having difficulty with the language used in this debate.

my deliberate misinterpretation is a fair reflection of what you have been doing

see what i did there

[SecretFly]

my deliberate misinterpretation is a fair reflection of what you have been doing

see what i did there

Nope...it wasn't a wise word curl, Quins...don't try to whisk it off as that now.  It's that when you don't like arguments that weigh to the YES side, or arguments that constantly challenge and kill a good Doomsday scenario script, you think of the opponent as potentially separatist, possibly a dangerous-thought clown and probably genetically seditious.

Afterall, Salmond, the evil man that he is, even got sewer rat, ghettoised-gutter tramps interested in a polling booth and a thing called voting!!!!!  The cheek of the man to indulge the fancies of such people  If they cast a vote its almost like saying its a spoiled vote 'cause they are not informed!  Only University Grads should have the right to vote...and informed people with jobs of course.



Carry on.

[whocares]

good point FA. if Scotland attempted to walk away from their share of UK debt, do we honestly think that the rUK would support Scottish entry to the EU (and hence the Euro)?

would be surprising frankly.

Indeed, which is why they won't and why they will respectively.  I don't buy for one second this notion that either side will act out of 'vengeful wrath' - as Fly often likes to say, both sides will act in their own best interests, and those are usually governed by practical economic realities

i agree. but threatening to walk away from debt if not given access to the pound (claiming a currency is an asset), is not very clever.

people remember dumb threats like that

Indeed.  Fortunately they also remember false promises: http://i4.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/article4265480.ece/alternates/s615b/1.jpg

you think none of that would happen ASBO? or its implementation just "further" delayed? those promises seem pretty clear and difficult to dodge.

[GLove39]

The soap-box vitriol coming out of the YES campaigners should be disturbing to any rational person.

Living in Scotland, unfortunately I can see at ground level it is working.

The biggest success to this campaign has been Salmonds to motivate the general riff raff of society to don half blue painted faces and head to the ballot boxes.

This is not a snobbery or elitist comments but the most vocal of any supporters are generally the people you will find in wetherspoons at 11am most days and/or 18 year olds who want "freedom" without having any grasp of the real issues of the debate.

I don't mind how people vote as long as they do so on an informed basis.

Unfortunately, I think a large underbelly of society are doing it on a Bravehart mentality.

That's about as accurate as describing everyone on the No side as an elitist millionaire or a member of the Orange Order.

I agree but the Yes voters or at least fair number of them have been very aggressive towards anyone, anything who stands back and says.. hang on a minute.

How Douglas Alexander could be booed for when talking about his mum who worked in the NHS for 40 years is deplorable. A job half these people have turned their nose up at because it doesn't pay enough, is too hard.

The NUJ have complained about the behaviour of one group in particular and how their members have been collectively harassed. The whole BBC bias protest at what... them asking him questions which he cannot answer. Who is he Putin?

Just look at how Salmond has been found out for bullying anyone who has a differing opinion like the rector of St. Andrews. Then he tried to insist on her changing her view and her comments through aggression alone.

Its a behaviour which has filtered from the top down I'm afraid.

I agree there's been ugly scenes, and I'm saddened by the actions of the people who go to debates and boo and also the cretin who lobbed eggs at Jim Murphy turning him into a martyr in the process, but they represent a tiny minority which I feel the media go out of there way to overblow.
On that topic the Scottish Police Federation released this statement this morning in response to the media coverage of the build up to the referendum which makes for an interesting read.

MEDIA RELEASE

The Scottish Police Federation represents all police officers in the ranks of constable, sergeant, inspector and chief inspector, police cadets and special constables, over 18,500 people, 98% of all police officers in Scotland.

To: News Editor
Date: 17 September 2014
Subject: Independence Referendum

In response to increased press reports and comment implying increased crime and disorder as a consequence of the Independence Referendum Brian Docherty, Chairman of the Scottish Police Federation said;

“The Police Service of Scotland and the men and women who work in it should not be used as a political football at any time and especially so in these last few hours of the referendum campaign.

As I have previously stated the referendum debate has been robust but overwhelmingly good natured.

It was inevitable that the closer we came to the 18th of September passions would increase but that does not justify the exaggerated rhetoric that is being deployed with increased frequency. Any neutral observer could be led to believe Scotland is on the verge of societal disintegration yet nothing could be further from the truth.

Scotland’s citizens are overwhelmingly law abiding and tolerant and it is preposterous to imply that by placing a cross in a box, our citizens will suddenly abandon the personal virtues and values held dear to them all.

At this time it is more important than ever that individuals be they politicians, journalists or whoever should carefully consider their words, maintain level heads and act with respect. Respect is not demonstrated by suggesting a minority of mindless idiots are representative of anything. One of the many joys of this campaign has been how it has awakened political awareness across almost every single section of society. The success enjoyed by the many should not be sullied by the actions of the few.

Police officers must be kept free from the distractions of rhetoric better suited to the playground that the political stump. If crime has been committed it will be investigated and dealt with appropriately but quite simply police officers have better things to do than officiate in spats on social media and respond to baseless speculation of the potential for disorder on and following polling day”

ENDS

[HammerofThunor]

The Liberal Democrates all made a big deal about signing a pledge saying they would never vote to increase university fees.

But when it came down to it they broke that pledge because they felt they had to. Basically all politicians will only follow their pledges if they still want to. If they dont...they break them.

[LordDowlais]

my deliberate misinterpretation is a fair reflection of what you have been doing

see what i did there

Nope...it wasn't a wise word curl, Quins...don't try to whisk it off as that now.  It's that when you don't like arguments that weigh to the YES side, or arguments that constantly challenge and kill a good Doomsday scenario script, you think of the opponent as potentially separatist, possibly a dangerous-thought clown and probably genetically seditious.

Afterall, Salmond, the evil man that he is, even got sewer rat, ghettoised-gutter tramps interested in a polling booth and a thing called voting!!!!!  The cheek of the man to indulge the fancies of such people  If they cast a vote its almost like saying its a spoiled vote 'cause they are not informed!  Only University Grads should have the right to vote...and informed people with jobs of course.




Carry on.

SecretFly, please, stop talking in riddles, and please stop being so provocative with how you say things, everybody has the right to vote, everybody, but what is happening here is people are not being told the truth if they vote YES, but seeing as you are so staunch in your views for the YES campaign, then perhaps you can answer the questions that Alex Salmond is so conveniently side stepping, and also can you please tell the YES voters that it will not be all plain sailing for them, and that a YES vote does not mean a utopian country where everything is better, because if we are being honest, it will be a lot worst than it is now.

[fa0019]

Glove

That's the problem

We see it in South Africa all the time. Call it hire a mob.

They bus groups of people in and get them to protest from town to town. Different days, same people. Often on the promise of a free meal alone.

But the fact that its just laughed off as banter is simply terrible.

[HammerofThunor]

I did see Darling this morning saying that he didn't want Scotland to be a country where people were heckled for their views, or talked over, etc (while talking over the interviewer who was trying to ask questions)...Has he never been awake during one of the parlimetary sessions? The ones where they all behave like children shouting at each other? Jeering and cheering based on the party of the people speaking? The jibs and the personal attacks? This is defended by Westminster as being 'robust'.

[fa0019]

my deliberate misinterpretation is a fair reflection of what you have been doing

see what i did there

Nope...it wasn't a wise word curl, Quins...don't try to whisk it off as that now.  It's that when you don't like arguments that weigh to the YES side, or arguments that constantly challenge and kill a good Doomsday scenario script, you think of the opponent as potentially separatist, possibly a dangerous-thought clown and probably genetically seditious.

Afterall, Salmond, the evil man that he is, even got sewer rat, ghettoised-gutter tramps interested in a polling booth and a thing called voting!!!!!  The cheek of the man to indulge the fancies of such people  If they cast a vote its almost like saying its a spoiled vote 'cause they are not informed!  Only University Grads should have the right to vote...and informed people with jobs of course.




Carry on.

SecretFly, please, stop talking in riddles, and please stop being so provocative with how you say things, everybody has the right to vote, everybody, but what is happening here is people are not being told the truth if they vote YES, but seeing as you are so staunch in your views for the YES campaign, then perhaps you can answer the questions that Alex Salmond is so conveniently side stepping, and also can you please tell the YES voters that it will not be all plain sailing for them, and that a YES vote does not mean a utopian country where everything is better, because if we are being honest, it will be a lot worst than it is now.

What I would find amusing is Salmond's excuses if he follows a route of keeping all other votes 18+. So hang on a minute you thought 16 year olds are rational enough to vote for a one off, no turning back question on your nations sovereignity but you must wait until you are 18 to vote for the government of your choice for the next 5 years... which of course you can repel next time if you so wish.

Surely all votes now should be 16+...

and you can vote but you can't drive, buy cigarettes, drink alcohol, get married???? Are they seen as more important?

[LordDowlais]

fa0019, look, I think Scotland CAN work as a country on it's own, but I DO NOT think that it will work as good as it does now, so, with that in mind, Salmond should be telling everybody the truth of it all before they vote, if people are willing to make sacrifices for the sake of national pride then so be it, but this is not what they are being told, they are being told that they will get everything Salmond wants, and David Dimbleby called him on this last night, and all he did was issue another patriotism cry, there are NO plans if a YES vote wins, there is NO plan if Westminster hold back the sterling, which it looks as though they would, and not once has he told the public that it will not be easy. If he came out and said something along the lines of "My fellow countrymen, we need our independence, it will not be easy, sacrifices will have to be made, and it will be tough, but at the end of it all we will have something we have never had, our own country" I would say to everybody Scottish, GO FOR IT, but he is not telling them this, he is peddling bullcrap about how much better off they will be and how Scotland will be one of the richest countries in the world, it is all pie in the sky.

[GLove39]

Glove

That's the problem

We see it in South Africa all the time. Call it hire a mob.

They bus groups of people in and get them to protest from town to town. Different days, same people. Often on the promise of a free meal alone.

But the fact that its just laughed off as banter is simply terrible.

I'll admit it is slightly suspicious just how quickly the protestors outside the BBC got that glossy well printed banner calling for Nick Robinson's resignation made...

But you can't deny that some of the protests are great banter, like the person outside the BBC with the clearly home-made sign saying, "look Mum, I'm not on TV".

Or this guy in rickshaw with a megaphone welcoming the 100 Labour MP's to Glasgow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiMXuEmqAHA More of this sort of thing please!

[SecretFly]

my deliberate misinterpretation is a fair reflection of what you have been doing

see what i did there

Nope...it wasn't a wise word curl, Quins...don't try to whisk it off as that now.  It's that when you don't like arguments that weigh to the YES side, or arguments that constantly challenge and kill a good Doomsday scenario script, you think of the opponent as potentially separatist, possibly a dangerous-thought clown and probably genetically seditious.

Afterall, Salmond, the evil man that he is, even got sewer rat, ghettoised-gutter tramps interested in a polling booth and a thing called voting!!!!!  The cheek of the man to indulge the fancies of such people  If they cast a vote its almost like saying its a spoiled vote 'cause they are not informed!  Only University Grads should have the right to vote...and informed people with jobs of course.




Carry on.

SecretFly, please, stop talking in riddles, and please stop being so provocative with how you say things, everybody has the right to vote, everybody, but what is happening here is people are not being told the truth if they vote YES, but seeing as you are so staunch in your views for the YES campaign, then perhaps you can answer the questions that Alex Salmond is so conveniently side stepping, and also can you please tell the YES voters that it will not be all plain sailing for them, and that a YES vote does not mean a utopian country where everything is better, because if we are being honest, it will be a lot worst than it is now.

You haven't been reading me.  You don't need so many 'Pleases'.............. I've already said more than once that honey pots of sunny breakfasts and lovely wheat bread idealism is only for fairytales.  I'm one of the few...................... the FEW.............. who even mention the truth of what will come AFTER the Vote, whichever way it goes.  I don't see you often talking about the truth of the aftermath even though you ask others to pontificate on it repeatedly.  I don't see many YES or NO people talking about the REALITY of the what will happen after any YES vote.  Mostly I hear the stories of Amaggeddon.   I bluntly say "Shyte" to those predictions from all sides.  Darling "Shyte"  Cameron "Shyte"  Banks "Shyte"  Salmond "Shyte".  They're all talking Shyte.

The TRUTH is there will be negotiations - everything on the table - EVERYTHING on the table - in the aftermath of a YES vote, if it happens.  They'll be long, they'll be detailed, much of it will take place behind closed doors and Alex Salmond WILL talk with and chat to Cameron and they will eventually work out a mutually beneficial relationship...

That's the TRUTH.  Are you prepared to admit that's the truth of a future after a prospective YES vote?  Because if you're not prepared to admit that TRUTH then there is liitle need for me to listen to your protestations that everyone else should come clean on the Truth.  You come clean on it.
People are NOT being told the TRUTH by the YES camp.  That is a solid UNTRUTH coming from you.  The YES camp are giving a pre-election VERSION of their Truth - nothing more.  A version of their truth that they know would need to be modified if they have to do business with someone else who holds a different VERSION of their TRUTH in the eventuality of a YES vote.

That's as clear as logic can get.  If you still don't understand me, then its hopeless for both of us because I can't explain logic any better right now.

[quinsforever]

Glove

That's the problem

We see it in South Africa all the time. Call it hire a mob.

They bus groups of people in and get them to protest from town to town. Different days, same people. Often on the promise of a free meal alone.

But the fact that its just laughed off as banter is simply terrible.

I'll admit it is slightly suspicious just how quickly the protestors outside the BBC got that glossy well printed banner calling for Nick Robinson's resignation made...

But you can't deny that some of the protests are great banter, like the person outside the BBC with the clearly home-made sign saying, "look Mum, I'm not on TV".

Or this guy in rickshaw with a megaphone welcoming the 100 Labour MP's to Glasgow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiMXuEmqAHA More of this sort of thing please!

that rickshaw clip is excellent. even all the labour MPs are cracking up one they get over the initial noise shock

[quinsforever]

very interesting article admitting that the polling figures could be quite inaccurate. and that the YES numbers my be understated!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29223389

[LordDowlais]

my deliberate misinterpretation is a fair reflection of what you have been doing

see what i did there

Nope...it wasn't a wise word curl, Quins...don't try to whisk it off as that now.  It's that when you don't like arguments that weigh to the YES side, or arguments that constantly challenge and kill a good Doomsday scenario script, you think of the opponent as potentially separatist, possibly a dangerous-thought clown and probably genetically seditious.

Afterall, Salmond, the evil man that he is, even got sewer rat, ghettoised-gutter tramps interested in a polling booth and a thing called voting!!!!!  The cheek of the man to indulge the fancies of such people  If they cast a vote its almost like saying its a spoiled vote 'cause they are not informed!  Only University Grads should have the right to vote...and informed people with jobs of course.




Carry on.

SecretFly, please, stop talking in riddles, and please stop being so provocative with how you say things, everybody has the right to vote, everybody, but what is happening here is people are not being told the truth if they vote YES, but seeing as you are so staunch in your views for the YES campaign, then perhaps you can answer the questions that Alex Salmond is so conveniently side stepping, and also can you please tell the YES voters that it will not be all plain sailing for them, and that a YES vote does not mean a utopian country where everything is better, because if we are being honest, it will be a lot worst than it is now.

You haven't been reading me.  You don't need so many 'Pleases'.............. I've already said more than once that honey pots of sunny breakfasts and lovely wheat bread idealism is only for fairytales.  I'm one of the few...................... the FEW.............. who even mention the truth of what will come AFTER the Vote, whichever way it goes.  I don't see you often talking about the truth of the aftermath even though you ask others to pontificate on it repeatedly.  I don't see many YES or NO people talking about the REALITY of the what will happen after any YES vote.  Mostly I hear the stories of Amaggeddon.   I bluntly say "Shyte" to those predictions from all sides.  Darling "Shyte"  Cameron "Shyte"  Banks "Shyte"  Salmond "Shyte".  They're all talking Shyte.

The TRUTH is there will be negotiations - everything on the table - EVERYTHING on the table - in the aftermath of a YES vote, if it happens.  They'll be long, they'll be detailed, much of it will take place behind closed doors and Alex Salmond WILL talk with and chat to Cameron and they will eventually work out a mutually beneficial relationship...

That's the TRUTH.  Are you prepared to admit that's the truth of a future after a prospective YES vote?  Because if you're not prepared to admit that TRUTH then there is liitle need for me to listen to your protestations that everyone else should come clean on the Truth.  You come clean on it.
People are NOT being told the TRUTH by the YES camp.  That is a solid UNTRUTH coming from you.  The YES camp are giving a pre-election VERSION of their Truth - nothing more.  A version of their truth that they know would need to be modified if they have to do business with someone else who holds a different VERSION of their TRUTH in the eventuality of a YES vote.

That's as clear as logic can get.  If you still don't understand me, then its hopeless for both of us because I can't explain logic any better right now.

Christ SF, why can't you just say all that in one paragraph ? Instead of intertwining words and repeating yourself, just say that you think there will be negotiations. But still, you are not answering any questions, just like the yes campaigners, I will ask you these questions, and if you decide to answer them, please, answer them a little more straight forward so we can read them properly:-

1. What is the plan if Westminster stand by their words and do not let Scotland use the sterling/pound ?

2. What are the plans if a yes vote wins ?

3. What if Westminster do not give Alex Salmond everything he is asking for, and telling the Scottish public that he is indeed having ?

Just those three questions for now.

[Scrumpy]

I just wish they could get on with it, then our MPs can get back to real world issues and commit to wiping out IS without the fear of losing votes in Scotland.

What is Salmonds stance on IS BTW?

[Jimpy]

"The TRUTH is there will be negotiations - everything on the table - EVERYTHING on the table - in the aftermath of a YES vote, if it happens. They'll be long, they'll be detailed, much of it will take place behind closed doors and Alex Salmond WILL talk with and chat to Cameron and they will eventually work out a mutually beneficial relationship..."

Are you absolutely sure? A lot of people round here, and as seen on TV in England, are so fed up with this debate, that if I (we) were Cameron, we'd slam the door and nail it shut in the event of a YES vote.

[ME-109]

my deliberate misinterpretation is a fair reflection of what you have been doing

see what i did there

Nope...it wasn't a wise word curl, Quins...don't try to whisk it off as that now.  It's that when you don't like arguments that weigh to the YES side, or arguments that constantly challenge and kill a good Doomsday scenario script, you think of the opponent as potentially separatist, possibly a dangerous-thought clown and probably genetically seditious.

Afterall, Salmond, the evil man that he is, even got sewer rat, ghettoised-gutter tramps interested in a polling booth and a thing called voting!!!!!  The cheek of the man to indulge the fancies of such people  If they cast a vote its almost like saying its a spoiled vote 'cause they are not informed!  Only University Grads should have the right to vote...and informed people with jobs of course.




Carry on.

SecretFly, please, stop talking in riddles, and please stop being so provocative with how you say things, everybody has the right to vote, everybody, but what is happening here is people are not being told the truth if they vote YES, but seeing as you are so staunch in your views for the YES campaign, then perhaps you can answer the questions that Alex Salmond is so conveniently side stepping, and also can you please tell the YES voters that it will not be all plain sailing for them, and that a YES vote does not mean a utopian country where everything is better, because if we are being honest, it will be a lot worst than it is now.

You haven't been reading me.  You don't need so many 'Pleases'.............. I've already said more than once that honey pots of sunny breakfasts and lovely wheat bread idealism is only for fairytales.  I'm one of the few...................... the FEW.............. who even mention the truth of what will come AFTER the Vote, whichever way it goes.  I don't see you often talking about the truth of the aftermath even though you ask others to pontificate on it repeatedly.  I don't see many YES or NO people talking about the REALITY of the what will happen after any YES vote.  Mostly I hear the stories of Amaggeddon.   I bluntly say "Shyte" to those predictions from all sides.  Darling "Shyte"  Cameron "Shyte"  Banks "Shyte"  Salmond "Shyte".  They're all talking Shyte.

The TRUTH is there will be negotiations - everything on the table - EVERYTHING on the table - in the aftermath of a YES vote, if it happens.  They'll be long, they'll be detailed, much of it will take place behind closed doors and Alex Salmond WILL talk with and chat to Cameron and they will eventually work out a mutually beneficial relationship...

That's the TRUTH.  Are you prepared to admit that's the truth of a future after a prospective YES vote?  Because if you're not prepared to admit that TRUTH then there is liitle need for me to listen to your protestations that everyone else should come clean on the Truth.  You come clean on it.
People are NOT being told the TRUTH by the YES camp.  That is a solid UNTRUTH coming from you.  The YES camp are giving a pre-election VERSION of their Truth - nothing more.  A version of their truth that they know would need to be modified if they have to do business with someone else who holds a different VERSION of their TRUTH in the eventuality of a YES vote.

That's as clear as logic can get.  If you still don't understand me, then its hopeless for both of us because I can't explain logic any better right now.

Christ SF, why can't you just say all that in one paragraph ? Instead of intertwining words and repeating yourself, just say that you think there will be negotiations. But still, you are not answering any questions, just like the yes campaigners, I will ask you these questions, and if you decide to answer them, please, answer them a little more straight forward so we can read them properly:-

1. What is the plan if Westminster stand by their words and do not let Scotland use the sterling/pound ?

2. What are the plans if a yes vote wins ?

3. What if Westminster do not give Alex Salmond everything he is asking for, and telling the Scottish public that he is indeed having ?

Just those three questions for now.

1. They cant stop Scotland using the Pound. Its impossible.
2. er...independence.
3. Clearly if Yes wins there will be negotiations for 18 months and it is also clear that it will be in both iScotlands and rUKs best interest to ensure these work to benefit both entities. Westminister cant and wont say NO NO NO to everything.

Also I watched Salmond on Dimbleby last night as well and thought he made Dimblelby look like a complete novice. Funny how perceptions affect your view. Salmond clearly stated that the details would be worked out post a Yes vote in normal negotiations. The answers to those questions are not forthcoming from Westminister either - in other words if the vote is Yes negotiations start on Friday. Its not that hard to understand and is clearly what Fly is saying.

[ME-109]

Saw an interesting letter in the IT today regarding the use of rUK. The suggestion was to change it to the Former UK to reflect the feelings in Westminister.

[SecretFly]

Christ SF, why can't you just say all that in one paragraph ? Instead of intertwining words and repeating yourself, just say that you think there will be negotiations. But still, you are not answering any questions, just like the yes campaigners, I will ask you these questions, and if you decide to answer them, please, answer them a little more straight forward so we can read them properly:-

1. What is the plan if Westminster stand by their words and do not let Scotland use the sterling/pound ?

2. What are the plans if a yes vote wins ?

3. What if Westminster do not give Alex Salmond everything he is asking for, and telling the Scottish public that he is indeed having ?

Just those three questions for now.

You obviously need acres of print to get it through to you, not just paragraphs. I try to make it easy for you by Capitalising certain words, emphahsising certain parts more than once to make the logic clear to you.

But you persist. You still won't admit there will be negotiations. You still can't say it. The furthest you get is to simply give my opinion back to me: "You think there will be negotiations"

It's not important what I think - I asked you to admit there will be negotiations. I didn't ask you to reconfirm that I 'think' there will be negotiations. BTW - I don't "think" there will be negotiations - I categorically KNOW there will be negotiations if the vote is YES.

Tell me I'm lying or simply admit I'm right.

But you're smart enough not to admit that TRUTH because you know to do so makes your constant list of questions to me obsolete. Negotiations kill all pre-vote TRUTHS from both sides. You keep saying the YES camp are being Honest. I say directly that is a lie. They are campaigning. A version is all they offer and they know everything will be on the cards if a YES vote succeeds.

[SecretFly]

"The TRUTH is there will be negotiations - everything on the table - EVERYTHING on the table - in the aftermath of a YES vote, if it happens.  They'll be long, they'll be detailed, much of it will take place behind closed doors and Alex Salmond WILL talk with and chat to Cameron and they will eventually work out a mutually beneficial relationship..."

Are you absolutely sure? A lot of people round here, and as seen on TV in England, are so fed up with this debate, that if I (we) were Cameron, we'd slam the door and nail it shut in the event of a YES vote.

You might do that...Cameron or any UK goverment Won't. We're trying to find the few facts we can here, remember. That's one of them. Negotiations WILL happen.

[SecretFly]

What is Salmonds stance on IS BTW?

Was Cameron interested before? He might be in a few weeks time

[Irish Londoner]

Only University Grads should have the right to vote...and informed people with jobs of course.

Carry on.

At last a policy which would unite The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian !!

On a serious note though, how many people make an educated choice when they vote and how many just vote for the same party they always have be that Labour in Sunderland or Conservative in Hastings - the whole of the Westminster parliament is predicated on the votes from about 20 constituencies, hence the parties chase the vote in Essex or wherever rather than accross the country.

[LordDowlais]

my deliberate misinterpretation is a fair reflection of what you have been doing

see what i did there

Nope...it wasn't a wise word curl, Quins...don't try to whisk it off as that now.  It's that when you don't like arguments that weigh to the YES side, or arguments that constantly challenge and kill a good Doomsday scenario script, you think of the opponent as potentially separatist, possibly a dangerous-thought clown and probably genetically seditious.

Afterall, Salmond, the evil man that he is, even got sewer rat, ghettoised-gutter tramps interested in a polling booth and a thing called voting!!!!!  The cheek of the man to indulge the fancies of such people  If they cast a vote its almost like saying its a spoiled vote 'cause they are not informed!  Only University Grads should have the right to vote...and informed people with jobs of course.




Carry on.

SecretFly, please, stop talking in riddles, and please stop being so provocative with how you say things, everybody has the right to vote, everybody, but what is happening here is people are not being told the truth if they vote YES, but seeing as you are so staunch in your views for the YES campaign, then perhaps you can answer the questions that Alex Salmond is so conveniently side stepping, and also can you please tell the YES voters that it will not be all plain sailing for them, and that a YES vote does not mean a utopian country where everything is better, because if we are being honest, it will be a lot worst than it is now.

You haven't been reading me.  You don't need so many 'Pleases'.............. I've already said more than once that honey pots of sunny breakfasts and lovely wheat bread idealism is only for fairytales.  I'm one of the few...................... the FEW.............. who even mention the truth of what will come AFTER the Vote, whichever way it goes.  I don't see you often talking about the truth of the aftermath even though you ask others to pontificate on it repeatedly.  I don't see many YES or NO people talking about the REALITY of the what will happen after any YES vote.  Mostly I hear the stories of Amaggeddon.   I bluntly say "Shyte" to those predictions from all sides.  Darling "Shyte"  Cameron "Shyte"  Banks "Shyte"  Salmond "Shyte".  They're all talking Shyte.

The TRUTH is there will be negotiations - everything on the table - EVERYTHING on the table - in the aftermath of a YES vote, if it happens.  They'll be long, they'll be detailed, much of it will take place behind closed doors and Alex Salmond WILL talk with and chat to Cameron and they will eventually work out a mutually beneficial relationship...

That's the TRUTH.  Are you prepared to admit that's the truth of a future after a prospective YES vote?  Because if you're not prepared to admit that TRUTH then there is liitle need for me to listen to your protestations that everyone else should come clean on the Truth.  You come clean on it.
People are NOT being told the TRUTH by the YES camp.  That is a solid UNTRUTH coming from you.  The YES camp are giving a pre-election VERSION of their Truth - nothing more.  A version of their truth that they know would need to be modified if they have to do business with someone else who holds a different VERSION of their TRUTH in the eventuality of a YES vote.

That's as clear as logic can get.  If you still don't understand me, then its hopeless for both of us because I can't explain logic any better right now.

Christ SF, why can't you just say all that in one paragraph ? Instead of intertwining words and repeating yourself, just say that you think there will be negotiations. But still, you are not answering any questions, just like the yes campaigners, I will ask you these questions, and if you decide to answer them, please, answer them a little more straight forward so we can read them properly:-

1. What is the plan if Westminster stand by their words and do not let Scotland use the sterling/pound ?

2. What are the plans if a yes vote wins ?

3. What if Westminster do not give Alex Salmond everything he is asking for, and telling the Scottish public that he is indeed having ?

Just those three questions for now.

1. They cant stop Scotland using the Pound. Its impossible.
2. er...independence.
3. Clearly if Yes wins there will be negotiations for 18 months and it is also clear that it will be in both iScotlands and rUKs best interest to ensure these work to benefit both entities. Westminister cant and wont say NO NO NO to everything.

Also I watched Salmond on Dimbleby last night as well and thought he made Dimblelby look like a complete novice. Funny how perceptions affect your view. Salmond clearly stated that the details would be worked out post a Yes vote in normal negotiations. The answers to those questions are not forthcoming from Westminister either - in other words if the vote is Yes negotiations start on Friday. Its not that hard to understand and is clearly what Fly is saying.

Well you clearly did not see the bit where Dimbleby asked Salmond if his whole plan was based on him getting every point he is asking for, he said yes, and then when he was asked if he did not get them what would he do, he just rambled on about the MP from Liverpool and how much he supported Salmond, well, that's not an answer, why do people think that because there is negotiations that Salmon will get everything, when it comes to negotiations both sides need something off each other, all Salmond has is the nuclear base, and he wants that gone within five years, Westminster have already said that he will NOT GET THE POUND, because they have said this, he should have plans anyway before negotiations just in case they stand by their words, he does not have this.

[Sponsored content]