Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Right, im a man who plays things straight down the middle, lets get down to brass tacks.

Look at this map of the UK today.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/

England IS conservative.

Scotland is either the openly bigoted SNP, Labour or Lib dem.

Why must we be tied to the Scots? They are clearly influencing English politics in a manner that would not be tolerated if the roles were reversed.

Ive long made my dislike of the Scots known, my own Grandfather was a Scot. I grew up reading Oor Wullie Books and supporting them at football, then i reached adulthood, was based up in Scotland as a Royal Marines and quickly realised that they will never get over the past, in a very pathetic and cringing manner.

Instead of pulling their socks up and cracking on, they like to whine about how "The English" are at fault for all of their woes. Even though it is 2010.

A Scot brought us into union with them after they were financially ruined, im not seeing why we cant leave it now.

And dont anybody childishly bring up oil and make me track down the figures via the Economist. i read an in depth article regarding that last year and trust me, it doesnt come close to covering the staggering output of English money into Scotland.

London keeps the UK afloat, ill happily admit my own North East of England contributes little as well, but this is irrelevant.

I want out of the union, what about you?

Any good reasons for staying in?

What can we do about politics? Is the current system fair to the inhabitants of England? Can we even break the union now?

The Scots want out as well right?

To be honest it would probably do the Scots good to cut them out of our economic and political loop; it must be awful given their history to know that they are in financial thrall to us

Srsly though, i think that their politicians shouldn't be allowed to vote on matters that only affect England (pretty sure that we can't vote on what goes on in their country) but as to cutting them off financially, I'd rather not have a third world country on our doorstep; think of the riff-raff.

No, not all scots want an end to the union. I don't for a start and the relatively poor showing of the party that could in theory provide one makes it clear I am not alone. I agree the map looks striking but consider the low population densities of many of those big areas. Last time I looked Scotland's population was less than Greater London.

As for whether an end to union would benefit England you may well be right in the short term but consider the future. If an independent Scotland flies then it competes with England, if it falls then unless you withdraw from Europe as well you are still paying for it. Let alone the problems that could arise with a Scotland going elsewhere for support. Fancy sharing a border with a Scotland that had aligned itself with Russia?

I know, I cant believe it when Scottish people say "we want our own indpendence!!!"

They might as well say "We want to be poor."

I will NEVER understand why they want self rule, it is like us in the north east saying we want independent rule because we used to be the kingdom of Northumbria in the 600's. They havent been self ruling for hundreds of years, could they rule themselves effectively without us?

What about NHS funding? Heck, the scottish need millions of health care money every year.

Not a bad point that Lero, although if the Scots ended up allied with Russia i would place some C4 along the border and push it into the North Sea with big sticks.

On a serious note, i didnt the constant attacks of the French make the British unite? Its like we realised we hated them more than each other. I think despite the banter, there is no genuine malice, and i would be very surprised if the Scots were to ever be allied with another nation than the English. I mean.. come on, Russia?!

Well the Scots got an easy ride, they kept public funded higher eduction (guess who paid for that) and their police and civil service don't beat the PC drum to the same extent. The average Scot wouldnt have it, and more strength to them.

However the reasons why independence wont happen is:

1. Scotland will immediately want the North Sea oil revenue to itself, and Westminster wont like that.

2. Scotland will take with it pretty much any chance of Labour getting back in, if Wales goes too even a turnout similar to 1997 will be unlikely to permit a Labour government.

3. Tories are die-hard Unionists and while they would profit from independance their own thinking is dead set against it.

4. The Scottish parliament gives Scotland a lot of autonomy, most Scots are satisfied with this much independence from Westminster.

5. There are plenty of English north of the border, many of whom are in positions of authority in the financial and oil industries and some polticians too. Independence is pretty much a guarantee of racial tensions.

6. Highland Scots are usually pro-monarchist and an independent Scotland is almost certain to become a republic.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:Not a bad point that Lero, although if the Scots ended up allied with Russia i would place some C4 along the border and push it into the North Sea with big sticks.

On a serious note, i didnt the constant attacks of the French make the British unite? Its like we realised we hated them more than each other. I think despite the banter, there is no genuine malice, and i would be very surprised if the Scots were to ever be allied with another nation than the English. I mean.. come on, Russia?!

France is the traditional ally of Scotland.

mattyrm wrote:Not a bad point that Lero, although if the Scots ended up allied with Russia i would place some C4 along the border and push it into the North Sea with big sticks.

On a serious note, i didnt the constant attacks of the French make the British unite? Its like we realised we hated them more than each other. I think despite the banter, there is no genuine malice, and i would be very surprised if the Scots were to ever be allied with another nation than the English. I mean.. come on, Russia?!

If by constant french attacks you mean English armies then you are 100% correct.

Scotland was far longer an ally of the french and an enemy of England than the other way around, and you could argue that what lead a lot of scots into fighting the french was the pay rather than the politics.

As for the connection with places like Russia, well remember here in north east scotland there is a long history of trade though the baltic. So connections with eastern europe run deep. Russia is keen to be the major player in energy supplies to europe, it's willing to get itself involved as far a field as Nigeria. What makes you think Scotland would be a stretch?

On the whole though I think it's true that most people in scotland enjoy a joke about the english but we'd miss you. That is unless you could float us off somewhere warmer.

Minor threadjack sorry.

Hey Leromides, as you are from aberdeen: What is the news from the street over the Trump/Menie thing. What do the bulk populace actually believe we only read very conflicting press reports with very obvious bias on both sides.

IIRC Britain united because the English ran out of acceptable Monarchs and had to borrow one of ours.

Matt you're right, the 'West Lothian' question is a load of crock, Scotland should not be able to influence english policy, much in the same way England can't influence scottish policy just now.

Also the Union was 'imposed' in the sense that there was suspicions of bribery among the Scottish Parliment (not an english problem, just the greed of the Scottish Politicians {no change there then}) but also the Union was English led, they saw an opportunity to tie Scotlands leadership to one of their liking, I don't think they ever looked beyond that to the future.

As usual once one side thinks they've been shortchanged in a deal they'll always want out of it, and the discovery of oil has only made it worse. (There you are I mentioned oil!) As an aside, while the income from oil is may not stack up in the present day, how about in the past when it was first discovered? Those figures have been concealed for many years which only adds to the suspicion.

Andrew

Oil reserves are conceled out of natioanl interest. The true status of North Sea reserves is an important secret that is best kept to ourselves (as in central government) for the sake of our industries. Knowledge is power.

This is not unfair, we had a Scottish PM who knew the totals.

We had a Scottish PM who remained in office as a result of strength of Labour support in Scotland.

There were figures revealed a few years back under FOI which showed a very different picture IIRC. And I'm not talking about reserves I'm talking about the revenue received.

Andrew

I will pay you guys ten American dollars for your Scotland.

Orkeosaurus wrote:I will pay you guys ten American dollars for your Scotland.

I see your ten and raise to CD$12.5 and the neighbor's rooster.

Hmm... interesting. We could eat and buy shoes for the bairn.

No, dammit! I want to be like the Braveheart guy!

I'll give you fifteen American dollars, a tupperware of roast beef, and a gift card for the Mall of America that may or may not have any money left on it. FINAL OFFER.

Hah, this is why everything is bigger in Texas. I'll raise my offer to MXN 165, a plate of fajitas, a UT Football Cheerleader 2009 calender, and a gallon of Gulf Crude (with only a little water in it) care of our friends at British Petroleum.

Argh, outbid!

...

Anyone want to ditch Northern Ireland?

Part of the population disagree with my political views, so lets get shot of them. Nice logic there genius. Democracy in action.

mattyrm wrote:Look at this map of the UK today.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/

England IS conservative.

Now try clicking the button belklow that map which says 'proportional' and consider moving to the south of england.

mattyrm wrote:England IS conservative.

I agree, this is 100% true.

However I think you meant "England IS Conservative", which is less than 40% true. Since I don't trust you, could you dig up those Scotland oil figures.

Disentangling the Union would be an immense amount of work and trouble.

How many of the nukes should they get?

Ah George.. never a dull moment when you are around.

First of all, lets not act like spelling errors or missed capital letters constitute an argument, im well aware you have a legendary capacity for being needlessly rude and trollish, but come on, dont lower yourself.

Secondly, read the statistics. With regards to a proportion of seats won it stands at

Conservative 297 +92

Labour 191 -87

Liberal Democrat 43 -4

This means that even if Labour and The Dems combined seats, they would still only total 234? Far less than the Tories 297.

Ergo, whatever way you want to "spin" it, England is overwhelmingly conservative with regards to seats it has allocated.

Regards figures from Oil revenue, here is an amusing article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-462324/The-new-apartheid.html

Sure, its the Daily Mail, but can you dispute the figures?

Whatwhat. I wont respond to your sarcasm, i know it upsets you poppet. I dont want you crying to the mods because someone answered you back.

The point is that a large portion of The Scots want independence and are able to effect laws in England. This would of course be entirely unacceptable to the Scots, what is it about my point you are struggling to understand?

Kilkrazy wrote:Disentangling the Union would be an immense amount of work and trouble.

How many of the nukes should they get?

12

Any more is just being silly!

Well, doesn't a dissolution always come to Civil War or something akin to it, like this:



Time to break out the historical miniatures!

mattyrm wrote:The point is that a large portion of The Scots want independence and are able to effect laws in England. This would of course be entirely unacceptable to the Scots, what is it about my point you are struggling to understand?

funny that. Since as it stands now westminster still sets a vast amount laws and policies in scotland, the devolved governments powers are limited. Hence why they have a vote in a general election.



I'm not hearing any calls for getting rid of the north of england or london yet mattyrm

whatwhat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:The point is that a large portion of The Scots want independence and are able to effect laws in England. This would of course be entirely unacceptable to the Scots, what is it about my point you are struggling to understand?

funny that. Since as it stands now westminster still sets a vast amount laws and policies in scotland, the devolved governments powers are limited. Hence why they have a vote in a general election.



I'm not hearing any calls for getting rid of the north of england or london yet mattyrm

Get Rid of Northern England. AND London!

Hell, we should go back to being a vassal of the Roman Empire!

whatwhat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:The point is that a large portion of The Scots want independence and are able to effect laws in England. This would of course be entirely unacceptable to the Scots, what is it about my point you are struggling to understand?

funny that. Since as it stands now westminster still sets a vast amount laws and policies in scotland, the devolved governments powers are limited. Hence why they have a vote in a general election.



I'm not hearing any calls for getting rid of the north of england or london yet mattyrm

So that means the Union controls the countryside while the Confederates have some of central and sounthern England. The Spanish seemed to have invaded parts of the North in Scotland and some of Wales and the Irish are struggling mightily to control what is left of Northern Ireland.

What is the battleplan guys?

WarOne wrote:So that means the Union controls the countryside while the Confederates have some of central and sounthern England. The Spanish seemed to have invaded parts of the North in Scotland and some of Wales and the Irish are struggling mightily to control what is left of Northern Ireland.

What is the battleplan guys?

Get back to Ireland

WarOne wrote:So that means the Union controls the countryside while the Confederates have some of central and sounthern England. The Spanish seemed to have invaded parts of the North in Scotland and some of Wales and the Irish are struggling mightily to control what is left of Northern Ireland.

What is the battleplan guys?

mattyrm on the case already, he's off to find his old spudgun in the attic as we speak.