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.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:

Lets be honest here, Scotland has a less than sterling reputation down south, being blamed for the length of time Labour was in power and having a disproportionate say in English affairs. Now we have yet another Scot saying that she is going to veto the referendum, that is not going to go down well. Independence for Scotland can only come with the agreement and cooperation of Westminster, and threatening them and defying the English populace is not going to make the process any easier

The reporting is nothing to do with her though and pissed off English brexiteers are surely quite likely to want to get rid of Scotland so that they could create their isolationist utopia?

Westminster is indeed shaking to pieces but if it starts blindly lashing out at the SP just watch the Yes% rise.....

I voted Brexit, not Isolation Land...

 Selym wrote:


I voted Brexit, not Isolation Land...

Consequences I'm afraid, we're likely to become quite isolated and our global voice will be diminished. If we continue on the same path then that will result in even more populist changes and so on. Unfortunately the UK has taken the decision to quit out of the current issues rather than tackle them head on.

 AndrewC wrote:
You're missing the point, it doesn't matter how many yes's there are, if Westminster doesn't agree to it, then nothing happens.

Not strictly true. The SP could conduct its own referendum and then issue a UDI which Westminster would basically have to acknowledge if it doesn't want to see its international reputation tarnished even further. It would be messy and nasty but its possible, in reality though Westminster is unlikely to block a second referendum. If it does of course it will only absolutely ensure an independent Scotland in a generation rather than a probable one in a decade or so.

 Selym wrote:
I voted Brexit, not Isolation Land...

Is there really a difference?

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Selym wrote:
I voted Brexit, not Isolation Land...

Is there really a difference?

Yes. It's hardly like the referendum asked "do you want to cut off all contact with other countries?"

I wanted us out of the EU. Not out of the planet. The EU is not the only thing on the planet, and we are still players in the UN and NATO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
George Osborne Confirmed:

BBC wrote:"Osborne 'to make statement before markets open'
============
Chancellor George Osborne's absence from the Sunday political programmes, and the post-referendum debate more generally, has been the subject of a lot of talk.

The Guardian reports that he will make a statement early on Monday morning in an attempt to reassure financial markets and avoid a repeat of Friday's volatility.

The newspaper quoted a Treasury spokesman saying Mr Osborne would set out how the government intended to “protect the national interest”"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-36570120

 Selym wrote:


I wanted us out of the EU. Not out of the planet. The EU is not the only thing on the planet, and we are still players in the UN and NATO.

Unfortunately our place on the UN and NATO will also be diminished. You no longer are part of a bloc of 500M (IIRC) people but, but by the time of the Scottish independence much closer to 50m. Our voice will be much smaller than it was. As part of the EU you had an agreed approach and the backing (generally) of the other member states. UK represented not only its interests but those of the other countries hence it had more weight. Take the UN security council - now France will take on the voice of the EU, we will be on our own, our voice will only represent the English people.

If you still want to see the UK as a significant player in the international scene then I recommend you review your view on leaving the EU. We have chosen to become more introverted, therefore other countries will treat us as such.

 AndrewC wrote:
You're missing the point, it doesn't matter how many yes's there are, if Westminster doesn't agree to it, then nothing happens.

And how is that going to look for the rest of the world? Will really show how strong an independent UK is, all right!

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
You're missing the point, it doesn't matter how many yes's there are, if Westminster doesn't agree to it, then nothing happens.

And how is that going to look for the rest of the world? Will really show how strong an independent UK is, all right!

Well China and North Korea might think it is OK but every western world might take a dim view of authoritarian nationalism (except maybe Trump he might think it is OK too).

Whirlwind wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
You're missing the point, it doesn't matter how many yes's there are, if Westminster doesn't agree to it, then nothing happens.

And how is that going to look for the rest of the world? Will really show how strong an independent UK is, all right!

Well China and North Korea might think it is OK but every western world might take a dim view of authoritarian nationalism (except maybe Trump he might think it is OK too).

Will make criticising China over their treatment of Hong Kong a bit difficult

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
You're missing the point, it doesn't matter how many yes's there are, if Westminster doesn't agree to it, then nothing happens.

And how is that going to look for the rest of the world? Will really show how strong an independent UK is, all right!

And how do you think it looks that a vote of 1.6 million people gets to override the votes of 17 million people?

Sauce for the goose etc..

Neither side comes out of this looking good, and in this particular case Sturgeon started it.

Cheers

Andrew

 Selym wrote:

The EU is not the only thing on the planet, and we are still players in the UN and NATO.

Indeed there are, its just a shame that the UK is now at the back of the queue.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Selym wrote:

The EU is not the only thing on the planet, and we are still players in the UN and NATO.

Indeed there are, its just a shame that the UK is now at the back of the queue.

We're used to queuing. It's the only thing we're good at.

 Selym wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Selym wrote:

The EU is not the only thing on the planet, and we are still players in the UN and NATO.

Indeed there are, its just a shame that the UK is now at the back of the queue.

We're used to queuing. It's the only thing we're good at.

Gonna make it a bit awkward when we've got a 2 year time limit, though.

 Selym wrote:

We're used to queuing. It's the only thing we're good at.

Indeed

 AndrewC wrote:
But it is how its being reported, Regardless, but the threat is there, and she has voiced it, and sorry I have to disagree with your opinion that she has rattled Westminster. They're already shaking to pieces after the vote.

Lets be honest here, Scotland has a less than sterling reputation down south, being blamed for the length of time Labour was in power and having a disproportionate say in English affairs. ... ...

Cheers

Andrew

What? To you, maybe. I've never had a problem with them.

There's a slight logical fallacy in the idea that when a minority of Scottish Labour MPs rule England it's bad, and when a majority English Conservative MPs rule Scotland it's bad. Or good. I don't even know what people really think any more.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
But it is how its being reported, Regardless, but the threat is there, and she has voiced it, and sorry I have to disagree with your opinion that she has rattled Westminster. They're already shaking to pieces after the vote.

Lets be honest here, Scotland has a less than sterling reputation down south, being blamed for the length of time Labour was in power and having a disproportionate say in English affairs. ... ...

Cheers

Andrew

What? To you, maybe. I've never had a problem with them.

There's a slight logical fallacy in the idea that when a minority of Scottish Labour MPs rule England it's bad, and when a majority English Conservative MPs rule Scotland it's bad. Or good. I don't even know what people really think any more.

I always get the idea that the Scottish Parliament feels that it is right for Scotland (at 5 million population) to dictate what England does (at over 50 million population), but feels that when it goes the other way it's oppression. And the SNP always seems surprised when it gets outvoted in Westminster.

 Selym wrote:
I always get the idea that the Scottish Parliament feels that it is right for Scotland (at 5 million population) to dictate what England does

I don't think that has ever actually happened. On the other hand Scotland hasn't returned a Tory majority since the 50's and has just been dragged out of the EU against its democratic wishes...

 Selym wrote:

And the SNP always seems surprised when it gets outvoted in Westminster.

Scotland will always be outvoted in Westminster and it has little means to prevent the imposition of things that the Scottish people don't want. That's one of the core reasons for the drive towards independence.

In the words of a certain N.Farage, its all about sovereignty

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Selym wrote:
I always get the idea that the Scottish Parliament feels that it is right for Scotland (at 5 million population) to dictate what England does

I don't think that has ever actually happened. On the other hand Scotland hasn't returned a Tory majority since the 50's and has just been dragged out of the EU against its democratic wishes...

 Selym wrote:

And the SNP always seems surprised when it gets outvoted in Westminster.

Scotland will always be outvoted in Westminster and it has little means to prevent the imposition of things that the Scottish people don't want. That's one of the core reasons for the drive towards independence.

In the words of a certain N.Farage, its all about sovereignty

However it's apparently okay for Sturgeon to prevent the UK/England from leaving the EU against its democratic wishes?

It's a threat that never should have been made. She should have made an announcement acknowledging the wishes of the referendum noting that Scotland did not agree with it and she was seeking a resolution to balancing the two opposed votes. And then went to Brussels asking if we can join as an independent nation. Now that she's metaphorically put the boot in, I worry that were going to get the boot back.

For a long time, Scotland acted as the kingmaker in English politics. Labour were always guaranteed to gain a huge block of seats from the Scottish constituencies, and it has only been in the last decade that the SNP has managed to break that stranglehold. Unfortunately that switch from Labour to SNP has had little in the way of effect at Westminster because SNP simply do not have a mandate or support south of the border and can't expand on their area of effect.

Whirlwind wrote:

 Selym wrote:


I voted Brexit, not Isolation Land...

Consequences I'm afraid, we're likely to become quite isolated and our global voice will be diminished. If we continue on the same path then that will result in even more populist changes and so on. Unfortunately the UK has taken the decision to quit out of the current issues rather than tackle them head on.

Tackle what head on? Why would the Germans and the French want to give up control of the EU? You just have to look at the previous Foot-and-Mouth incidents to see where they attempted to sabotage the United Kingdom. That kind of idea works best when everyone is willing to co-operate.

Speaking of cooperation, Germany and France are stated to be in agreement on how to handle Brexit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36636762

BBC wrote:French President Francois Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke on Sunday night about how to respond to the UK's Brexit vote.
An aide to the French leader said both were in "full agreement on how to handle the situation" and the need to act quickly to "avoid uncertainties"

 Monokuma wrote:

Whirlwind wrote:

 Selym wrote:


I voted Brexit, not Isolation Land...

Consequences I'm afraid, we're likely to become quite isolated and our global voice will be diminished. If we continue on the same path then that will result in even more populist changes and so on. Unfortunately the UK has taken the decision to quit out of the current issues rather than tackle them head on.

Tackle what head on? Why would the Germans and the French want to give up control of the EU? You just have to look at the previous Foot-and-Mouth incidents to see where they attempted to sabotage the United Kingdom. That kind of idea works best when everyone is willing to co-operate.

How did the EU attempt to sabotage Britain over Foot-and-Mouth? By instituting successful quarantine procedures?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Monokuma wrote:

Whirlwind wrote:

 Selym wrote:


I voted Brexit, not Isolation Land...

Consequences I'm afraid, we're likely to become quite isolated and our global voice will be diminished. If we continue on the same path then that will result in even more populist changes and so on. Unfortunately the UK has taken the decision to quit out of the current issues rather than tackle them head on.

Tackle what head on? Why would the Germans and the French want to give up control of the EU? You just have to look at the previous Foot-and-Mouth incidents to see where they attempted to sabotage the United Kingdom. That kind of idea works best when everyone is willing to co-operate.

How did the EU attempt to sabotage Britain over Foot-and-Mouth? By instituting successful quarantine procedures?

The United Kingdom was forced to make massive culls to its livestock industry during the original crisis. Which is fair enough, procedures and all. But the French who had the same outbreak were not asked to make similar culls. It took many years for the UK Livestock industry to recover, while the French prospered. It would have been more reasonable for both nations to have culls, since you know, the infection was in both countries.

 Monokuma wrote:


The United Kingdom was forced to make massive culls to its livestock industry during the original crisis. Which is fair enough, procedures and all. But the French who had the same outbreak were not asked to make similar culls. It took many years for the UK Livestock industry to recover, while the French prospered. It would have been more reasonable for both nations to have culls, since you know, the infection was in both countries.

The UK was the source of the outbreak and also failed to control the initial spread adequately. France caught the outbreaks faster and dealt with them better. That is the reason that less of their livestock needed to be culled, less of it was exposed to the infection. There was no conspiracy against british farming.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Monokuma wrote:


The United Kingdom was forced to make massive culls to its livestock industry during the original crisis. Which is fair enough, procedures and all. But the French who had the same outbreak were not asked to make similar culls. It took many years for the UK Livestock industry to recover, while the French prospered. It would have been more reasonable for both nations to have culls, since you know, the infection was in both countries.

The UK was the source of the outbreak and also failed to control the initial spread adequately. France caught the outbreaks faster and dealt with them better. That is the reason that less of their livestock needed to be culled, less of it was exposed to the infection. There was no conspiracy against british farming.

It is not something that could have been predicted. There was no stimulus to help bring back the British livestock industry after the event, something that should have happened to support a fellow EU nation.

Going, Going.....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3661277/Blame-Juncker-Brussels-chief-told-stands-Britain-voted-against-quit.html

I'll be happy when this snake has no power or influence

Should Juncker go, it'd be one huge point in favour of actually staying in. The man's a giant [!#@~/<%£?].

I wonder if Leave voters would change their minds if Juncker does step down.

Obviously, more has to be done within the EU (Remain voters have always acknowledged that) but reform might be a lot easier without Juncker as president.

Personally I take everything the Daily Mail says with a pinch of salt, it's not a highly regarded newspaper. A lot of it's online articles are click bait or have wrong information.

 Selym wrote:
I voted Brexit, not Isolation Land...

Put simply, what you actually voted for doesn't matter as much as how the people who will actually be in charge of the exit will handle it. You may not want Isolation Land, but if that's what your elected leaders end up going for...

Britain regains right to view Americans as 'stupid' again...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3661016/Sarah-Palin-congratulates-UK-European-Union-Brexit-urges-U-S-follow-suit-abandon-UN.html

Sarah Palin congratulates the UK on Brexit and urges the U.S. to 'follow suit' and abandon the UN

Sooo much facepalm....

I knew America had a Trump card, I hadn't expected it to be played so soon...

You see what you guys did?! Now the Wicked Witch is back!