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.

So whats the dealio up there? NPR noted there are like 5mm Scots. Thats it?
How will Britain remain free if vital haggis supplies are cut off. Zombie Hitler's out there, just waiting for his chance to strike!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-19946156

It's a shame to toss away 300 years of history but to be honest, I'm fairly sick of Jocks whinging about how much better off they'd be without being part of the UK. Which is fine; they may well be, but I'd like to see how they plan on paying for all their sweeping social polices like free prescriptions, no tuition fees etc etc without the rather large subsidies they currently receive from Westminster.

The lazy answer has always been to say that North Sea Oil will pay for it if they aren't paying that into UK treasuries but we shall see.

If I recall correctly Scotland leaving the UK will not be economically beneficial for Scotland. Every region of the UK is loss making with the exception of London and the South East.

Now the Texans will just get ideas again.

Just 300 years of history not more like 700+ (probably more I'm just being lazy)? Or do we not count those because they were pre Acts of Union?
I have my doubts this referendum will succeed, but hey who knows right?

Ask your average Englishman if he would give a gak about the Jocks leaving the Union. Go on, ask him.

Wouldn't you need a new flag?

I think they should extend the referendum to England, then we could be sure to be rid of them.

The jocks are muttering that they may have to stop the extent of free education, perscriptions etc due to costs. Something about there being a budget black hole?

If they do away with all that then my sis may come back across the border. Which won't be pleasant for me. The longer the Scots keep her up there the better.

Why do Brits, and I assume they are English in this case, call Scots; Jocks? Is it for jock strap?

Cheers for making the case to stay in the Union so much harder guys, some Scottish people actually appreciate the Union and don't want independence.

There's nothing more frightening than being trapped in a country entirely governed by Scottish Nationals...

 AustonT wrote:
Why do Brits, and I assume they are English in this case, call Scots; Jocks? Is it for jock strap?

The best answer comes from Dr Karina Bibicheff, apparently:

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070628182350AA3FgpO

'Jock' is a Scottish diminutive of John or sometimes James (through Jacob). Scots are sometimes called 'Jocks' the way the Irish are sometimes called 'Paddys' (from Patrick) or the Welsh 'Taffys' (from the Welsh form of David). David and Patrick are the patron saints of these countries hence their widespread popularity - Andrew is Scotland's patron but during the war of succession with England the Scots supported King James and the jacobite cause, linking Scotland firmly with 'Jocks'.

 Medium of Death wrote:

There's nothing more frightening than being trapped in a country entirely governed by Scottish Nationals...

I remember Brown. [shudders]

 AustonT wrote:
Why do Brits, and I assume they are English in this case, call Scots; Jocks? Is it for jock strap?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8094716.stm

The origins of Jock go back hundreds of years, with some of the first recorded references coming in the 18th and 19th Centuries.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as slang for a Scottish or northern English sailor or soldier, as well as for any Scotsman.
The OED also notes its first appearance as a "jeering appellation" for a north-country seaman, but it was the 20th Century and World War I which cemented it into the British psyche, along with Tommy and Taff.
The army connections are strong and indeed the Black Watch are proud to call themselves The Jocks.
Andrew Pierce, the assistant editor of the Daily Telegraph, said: "Jock is just a term of affection in the same way Paddy is a term of affection for the Irish.

.... Growing up I have vague memories of being told it was related to the Jaocbites, no idea as to the veracity of this.

I think most people dont want to end the union, its just a vocal minority, as always.

People who dont much care dont much talk. The haters, say about 10-20% of Jocks whinge and whine and are clearly and vocally bigoted towards English people.. generally the people who have never been South and think that we eat babies.

In turn, some English people have seen how the minority of Scots act, and absolutely despise the Scots in turn. Its alright jesus saying "offer your other cheek" but most people repay hate with hate.

Meanwhile the majority of both nations are not as bothered either way.

I cant see it affecting my life so I don't much care. However for the sake of history, and the many Scottish Royal Marines, who would possibly have to leave and join a Scottish regiment (Pretty much all of them would renounce their Scottish citizenship given the choice!) I will say I hope they dont bother.

I have never seen the need personally.. you can be aggresiveely English/Scottish/Welsh and still be British.

You can call yourself Scotty McHaggis, sword dance, sit on a bucket, wear a kilt seven days a week and never eat vegetables, and be first and foremost Scottish without needing to not be British as well, so why bother?

Also, if Scotland and England were separate Olympic teams, both England and Scotland would be down the medal table several places... so maybe were both better off eh?

The bigger the better.. Imagine if the USA was 50 separate nations? Bye bye that Olympic number one spot!

That's funny I thought it was Jacobin related too.
/threadjack
Thanks Red.

 d-usa wrote:
Now the Texans will just get ideas again.

Well you do have oil, and we do have a destroyer, U Boat, carrier, and a working B17. Someone please tell when the referendum is official. We can preplan the flight and have the B-17 over Edinburgh fifteen minutes after...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d-usa wrote:
Wouldn't you need a new flag?

A windblown kilt? AHHHHWHAT HAS BEEN SEEN CANNOT BE UNSEEN!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:

 AustonT wrote:
Why do Brits, and I assume they are English in this case, call Scots; Jocks? Is it for jock strap?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8094716.stm

The origins of Jock go back hundreds of years, with some of the first recorded references coming in the 18th and 19th Centuries.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as slang for a Scottish or northern English sailor or soldier, as well as for any Scotsman.
The OED also notes its first appearance as a "jeering appellation" for a north-country seaman, but it was the 20th Century and World War I which cemented it into the British psyche, along with Tommy and Taff.
The army connections are strong and indeed the Black Watch are proud to call themselves The Jocks.
Andrew Pierce, the assistant editor of the Daily Telegraph, said: "Jock is just a term of affection in the same way Paddy is a term of affection for the Irish.

.... Growing up I have vague memories of being told it was related to the Jaocbites, no idea as to the veracity of this.

I would not say Paddy is a term of affection to the Irish, unless you think being punched in the face is how the Irish greet everyone. (well, that might be accurate actually...)
Welcome to Ireland, we'll punch you in the face boyo!

 mattyrm wrote:
I think most people dont want to end the union, its just a vocal minority, as always.

People who dont much care dont much talk. The haters, say about 10-20% of Jocks whinge and whine and are clearly and vocally bigoted towards English people.. generally the people who have never been South and think that we eat babies.

In turn, some English people have seen how the minority of Scots act, and absolutely despise the Scots in turn. Its alright jesus saying "offer your other cheek" but most people repay hate with hate.

Meanwhile the majority of both nations are not as bothered either way.

I cant see it affecting my life so I don't much care. However for the sake of history, and the many Scottish Royal Marines, who would possibly have to leave and join a Scottish regiment (Pretty much all of them would renounce their Scottish citizenship given the choice!) I will say I hope they dont bother.

I have never seen the need personally.. you can be aggresiveely English/Scottish/Welsh and still be British.

I don't hate the Scots, but I do dislike the fact that because of the votes of Scottish MPs in Westminster we English now have to pay for University (even if we go to a Scottish university, something students from Europe don't have to do). And the fact it's a drain on resources (not Northern Ireland level but still...).

Aye I think it will have came about in the military. Tommy, Jock, Taffy and Paddy.

There are gak loads of military ones, I reckon they contribute to about half of our slang in general. A great many of the words in my "jackspeak" (Naval dictionary) are words I used anyway growing up.

Other good ones, probably not known to Americans, are the common ones for sirnames.

Like if your surname is Taylor, you get called Tug. And all of the common surnames have nicknames that get used instead of your name in the military, such as Smith - Smudge, White-Knocker, Bell - Dinger, Gardner - Digger, and one I never ever figured out was Collins - Jumper.

The really common ones such as Smith and White actually make things confusing. You will be in the galley and someone will say "Have you seen Smudge?" and get about 8 different answers.

@ Fraz you know why Texas will never rise again? Because THP is patrolling the highways in boats.

Why is it that independence movements are always popular with people who are reliant on the people they want independence from? Why is it never London or New York that want to break away to keep the leeches from stealin' their money?

 ShumaGorath wrote:
Why is it that independence movements are always popular with people who are reliant on the people they want independence from? Why is it never London or New York that want to break away to keep the leeches from stealin' their money?

If London had independance its not just Scotland is fethed. Its absolutely all of us..The North East is totally screwed en-masse, and Yorkshire would be forced to invade Scotland to ward off starvation.

 AustonT wrote:
@ Fraz you know why Texas will never rise again? Because THP is patrolling the highways in boats.

Whats the problem? In normal years Houston is a semiliquid environment. Thats just good thinking.

I hear Scotland is pretty damp. We can use that as our armored column.

 mattyrm wrote:
Aye I think it will have came about in the military. Tommy, Jock, Taffy and Paddy.

There are gak loads of military ones, I reckon they contribute to about half of our slang in general. A great many of the words in my "jackspeak" (Naval dictionary) are words I used anyway growing up.

Other good ones, probably not known to Americans, are the common ones for sirnames.

Like if your surname is Taylor, you get called Tug. And all of the common surnames have nicknames that get used instead of your name in the military, such as Smith - Smudge, White-Knocker, Bell - Dinger, Gardner - Digger, and one I never ever figured out was Collins - Jumper.

The really common ones such as Smith and White actually make things confusing. You will be in the galley and someone will say "Have you seen Smudge?" and get about 8 different answers.

We definitely don't have the slang names like you guys apparently do, Call sign and nickname culture is very much to the individual. Like one Corporal in my flight team was squirrel because he was always munching on fruits, nuts and granola... like a squirrel. I was Glock due to my last name, and so forth. It is funny talking to civilians or non-Marines after you learn to talk like a proper Marine "I gotta hit the head, it's down the ladder well and through the left hatch right?" "What did you just say?"

ShumaGorath wrote:Why is it that independence movements are always popular with people who are reliant on the people they want independence from? Why is it never London or New York that want to break away to keep the leeches from stealin' their money?

New York needs us a hell of a lot more than we need New York, Unlike California which has an actual economy NYC is dependent on the national economy to work. Without the rest of us it's 8 million starving people in an urban sprawl; that we can gouge even deeper on goods and services they can't produce themselves, which is pretty much everything.

California could easily be self sufficient, however politicians keep spending too much money.

Taxing the export of agricultural products alone would bring in tons of cash.

 Grey Templar wrote:
California could easily be self sufficient,

Which is pretty much what I said.

It would be highly entertaining to see the Scots become independent. Maybe Bono would do a gig for them.

Eveytime I play England...I invade Scotland first......then Ireland...then I have a policy of "scortch earth" for the france. Capture Paris and destroy everything and abandon the city.....wait...thats a game I'm talking about...

 AustonT wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Why is it that independence movements are always popular with people who are reliant on the people they want independence from? Why is it never London or New York that want to break away to keep the leeches from stealin' their money?

New York needs us a hell of a lot more than we need New York, Unlike California which has an actual economy NYC is dependent on the national economy to work. Without the rest of us it's 8 million starving people in an urban sprawl; that we can gouge even deeper on goods and services they can't produce themselves, which is pretty much everything.

It could pull that off alone, you don't need to produce food to get it cheap.