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.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I don't know, after the brexit vote, that's all the justification they need, IMO. Wasn't one of the main arguments against the referendum that it would disrupt the economy and Scotland would no longer be part of the EU? Well that's all out of the window now.

it's a little different. The UK can survive quite merrily outside the EU. Whereas Scotland would pretty much go broke. They'd either have to get rid of their NHS or their free university education.

I thought Scotland gave more in taxes than they got? I will admit, I am just an ignorant American here.

They did until a few years ago. Since the oil industry collapsed, the country is now badly in deficit and relies on UK funding to make up the shortfall.

 Ketara wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I don't know, after the brexit vote, that's all the justification they need, IMO. Wasn't one of the main arguments against the referendum that it would disrupt the economy and Scotland would no longer be part of the EU? Well that's all out of the window now.

it's a little different. The UK can survive quite merrily outside the EU. Whereas Scotland would pretty much go broke. They'd either have to get rid of their NHS or their free university education.

I thought Scotland gave more in taxes than they got? I will admit, I am just an ignorant American here.

They did until a few years ago. Since the oil industry collapsed, the country is now badly in deficit and relies on UK funding to make up the shortfall.

Ah, my knowledge mostly comes from back during the Independence referendum kerfuffle, so that would explain it.

 welshhoppo wrote:
[Whereas Scotland would pretty much go broke.

Oh really?

As for the deficit we could simply not spend anything on defence, that would clear it

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
[Whereas Scotland would pretty much go broke.

Oh really?

As for the deficit we could simply not spend anything on defence, that would clear it

Then don't expect NATO membership with its minimum 2% of GDP defence spending requirement; or EU Membership once this EU army becomes a reality and expects similar defence spending from its members to NATO; or for rUK to come rushing to your defence when Russian jets start infringing on your air space.

You want to be an independent nation? Providing for your own national defence and security is one of the duties of national independence.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Then don't expect NATO membership with its minimum 2% of GDP defence spending requirement; or EU Membership once this EU army becomes a reality and expects similar defence spending from its members to NATO; or for rUK to come rushing to your defence when Russian jets start infringing on your air space.

The SNP has never been keen on NATO and as for the others, lol.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
[Whereas Scotland would pretty much go broke.

Oh really?

As for the deficit we could simply not spend anything on defence, that would clear it

Then don't expect NATO membership with its minimum 2% of GDP defence spending requirement; or EU Membership once this EU army becomes a reality and expects similar defence spending from its members to NATO; or for rUK to come rushing to your defence when Russian jets start infringing on your air space.

You want to be an independent nation? Providing for your own national defence and security is one of the duties of national independence.

That is very true, now whether our Brexit vote and the increasing dissent against the EU in other nations has/will put on hold the EU national army I don't know. Is the EU national defence force still going ahead? In any case Scotland would have to prop up its own military capacity, now whether Scotland is already paying its share of force, or whether the UK as a whole is propping up the level of investment in Scottish Defence we will never know until the time arises. If Scotland does go independent they may find themselves having to pay more for what they have already got and that could lead to disarmament and job losses if the SNP make economy savings. I doubt that would go down well with servicemen/women or the public. Further points to consider would be the UK's submarine set up in Scotland, it would be illogical to lose the whole invested setup and loss to the local economy for the SNP to throw the navy out. Also what of the Queens Estate? Or should I say UK government's Estate granted to the Queen? Would an independent Scotland still register a Monarch with the same liberties and also would they scrap all the royal units? Would said units remain under British control or Scottish control. I think the whole defence issue would be one big mess if Scotland went independent for many years.

Sliding into the realms of hypothetical thought, if Russia successfully invades a militarily incompetent EU and looks to finish the UK off, and independent Scotland could be our undoing. I doubt the SNP or whoever would increase military spending or update its inventory at all. As you say Russian jets could break Scottish Air Space and practically have control of the skies. If a strong Russia fleet had supremacy in the North Sea they could land Marine units and then launch a full scale invasion by island-hopping on the North of Scotland and moving South by keeping shipping covered in well defended lochs. It would be a back door left open to defeat England quickly. Now I seriously doubt such a doomsday event would come, but sharing a land border with a weak military state isn't the best of ideas in my books.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Then don't expect NATO membership with its minimum 2% of GDP defence spending requirement; or EU Membership once this EU army becomes a reality and expects similar defence spending from its members to NATO; or for rUK to come rushing to your defence when Russian jets start infringing on your air space.

The SNP has never been keen on NATO and as for the others, lol.

Lol? Thats your counter argument??

Russia has been probing the UKs airspace more frequently and brazenly in recent years. If Scotland decides to split from the UK AND scrap its own military, how is it going to defend against Russian aggression?

@Sentinel1

Britain is one of the Barriers to an EU military. And now we're leaving.

What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response? And why would they? It's England that is their "enemy". Now I wouldn't say that they could get away with no miitary, but they could certainly get away with a very small military, being protected by being on an island and positioning. Unless England tries to invade, but somehow I doubt that will happen.

Um... Scotland isn't land locked.

 Compel wrote:
Um... Scotland isn't land locked.

Err, oops.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response? And why would they? It's England that is their "enemy". Now I wouldn't say that they could get away with no miitary, but they could certainly get away with a very small military, being protected by being land-locked and positioning. Unless England tries to invade, but somehow I doubt that will happen.

Have you heard of this new fangled modern invention called Fighter jets? Russia is quite fond of sending them to probe other countries airspaces, its like a national past time of theirs.

As for being "land-locked"...you do realise that Scotland is surrounded on three sides by ocean? Hell, can you point to Scotland on a world map?

I don't know whether to laugh or imprint my face onto my desk.

It's not helpful for anyone if Russia can fly over Scottish airspace with impunity, which they absolutely will do given the opportunity, if only for a show of power. Russian bombers regularly probe our airspace and have to be escorted out.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response? And why would they? It's England that is their "enemy". Now I wouldn't say that they could get away with no miitary, but they could certainly get away with a very small military, being protected by being land-locked and positioning. Unless England tries to invade, but somehow I doubt that will happen.

I was talking hypothetical worst scenario for both Scotland and the UK, as I said I doubt that would ever happen. The UK would never invade, but you could never rule out military assistance/intervention to rectify a situation. I am not against an independent Scotland, if the people want it give it to them, but for the time being I think Scotland's best interest is still to get as much out of the UK as possible and visa versa.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Um... Scotland isn't land locked.

Err, oops.

Were you perhaps confusing Scotland with Switzerland or the Central African Republic?

As for "what can Russia do without an international response", it is foolish and irresponsible and outright wrong for a nation to complacently expect other Nations to come to its defence. If Scotland wants to be an independent Nation, they should bloody well pay for their own airforce and navy to patrol their airspace and national waters, they have no right to sponge off other nations.

You also cannot rely on foreign nations to come to your defence. They will do so only if it is in their own interests. What if the rest of Europe decides they can't win a conflict with Russia, and therefore its not in their interests?

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
It's not helpful for anyone if Russia can fly over Scottish airspace with impunity, which they absolutely will do given the opportunity, if only for a show of power. Russian bombers regularly probe our airspace and have to be escorted out.

As far as I am aware our jets don't go in Russian airspace, I believe when one of their Tupolev Bear Bombers or fighters gets in our airspace we should force the plane to land, process the crew and send them back to Russia. If they want they plane back send it back as a lump of scrap or else destroy it. That would send a message to the Russians alright!

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response? And why would they? It's England that is their "enemy". Now I wouldn't say that they could get away with no miitary, but they could certainly get away with a very small military, being protected by being land-locked and positioning. Unless England tries to invade, but somehow I doubt that will happen.

Have you heard of this new fangled modern invention called Fighter jets? Russia is quite fond of sending them to probe other countries airspaces, its like a national past time of theirs.

And, again, what does that actually do, besides allow Russia to band their chest? Unless, of course, you are suggesting Russia is going to start bombing Scotland. And if you read what I wrote, I said they can get away with a small military.

As for being "land-locked"...you do realise that Scotland is surrounded on three sides by ocean? Hell, can you point to Scotland on a world map?

I don't know whether to laugh or imprint my face onto my desk.

It was a mistake, which I corrected (and I know where Scotland is, no need to be an donkey-cave, I just mixed up the phrase).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Um... Scotland isn't land locked.

Err, oops.

Were you perhaps confusing Scotland with Switzerland or the Central African Republic?

Try re-reading the post, smartass. I mixed up my words and wrote the wrong thing down. Shockingly people occasionally say things wrong on occasion.

As for "what can Russia do without an international response", it is foolish and irresponsible and outright wrong for a nation to complacently expect other Nations to come to its defence. If Scotland wants to be an independent Nation, they should bloody well pay for their own airforce and navy to patrol their airspace and national waters, they have no right to sponge off other nations.

And, again I said small military, not no military. They would just need a small self-defense force.

You also cannot rely on foreign nations to come to your defence. They will do so only if it is in their own interests. What if the rest of Europe decides they can't win a conflict with Russia, and therefore its not in their interests?

Are you actualy implying that if Russia invaded Scotland, England wouldn't respond?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response? And why would they? It's England that is their "enemy". Now I wouldn't say that they could get away with no miitary, but they could certainly get away with a very small military, being protected by being land-locked and positioning. Unless England tries to invade, but somehow I doubt that will happen.

Have you heard of this new fangled modern invention called Fighter jets? Russia is quite fond of sending them to probe other countries airspaces, its like a national past time of theirs.

And, again, what does that actually do, besides allow Russia to band their chest? Unless, of course, you are suggesting Russia is going to start bombing Scotland. And if you read what I wrote, I said they can get away with a small military.

So you're OK with Russia flying military aircraft with impunity over Alaska and the West Coast?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Are you actualy implying that if Russia invaded Scotland, England wouldn't respond?

No. I'm saying if its not in our own national interests to engage in a costly war with Russia that we have no hope of winning to defend a foreign Nation that won't lift a finger in its own defence, then we shouldn't respond.

Obviously the prospect of War with Russia in the near future is extremely unlikely in the present, but we don't know what state the world will be in, in 50 or 100 years time. The purpose of a military is not just to defend against current known threats, its to ensure we're prepared for unknown threats in the future.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

And, again, what does that actually do, besides allow Russia to band their chest? Unless, of course, you are suggesting Russia is going to start bombing Scotland. And if you read what I wrote, I said they can get away with a small military.

Exactly. The independence white paper has a small Scottish defense force (an infantry brigade, some dual role helicopters, some small warships and a fighter Sqn).

No one is going to be invading Scotland, except perhaps the English, which means that getting over excited about some Russian fighters on sabre rattling missions is a pointless exercise.

This is FAR cheaper and arguably just as effective anyway.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response? And why would they? It's England that is their "enemy". Now I wouldn't say that they could get away with no miitary, but they could certainly get away with a very small military, being protected by being land-locked and positioning. Unless England tries to invade, but somehow I doubt that will happen.

Have you heard of this new fangled modern invention called Fighter jets? Russia is quite fond of sending them to probe other countries airspaces, its like a national past time of theirs.

And, again, what does that actually do, besides allow Russia to band their chest? Unless, of course, you are suggesting Russia is going to start bombing Scotland. And if you read what I wrote, I said they can get away with a small military.

So you're OK with Russia flying military aircraft with impunity over Alaska and the West Coast?

I'll be honest, I don't really give a gak about them buzzing out airspace. They shouldn't but it doesn't actually do anything. It's the equivalent of chest-banging, and they do stuff like it all the time. And for small country like Scotland, they would only need a small number of jets to "protect" themselves from it. Again, I this is like the fifth time I've said this Small not none.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:


Are you actualy implying that if Russia invaded Scotland, England wouldn't respond?

That Scenario would be a double edged sword, England would have to respond, at the very least having a fortified line running along the Hadrian's wall boundary. It would be stupid to let an invader side step you and then give up. As for a chain of events if England and rest of the UK did go to war to against Russia invading Scotland, no doubt the United States would send a military response to help the UK and to also help Scotland.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


No. I'm saying if its not in our own national interests to engage in a costly war with Russia that we have no hope of winning to defend a foreign Nation that won't lift a finger in its own defence, then we shouldn't respond.

I don't really see the point in arguing with you if you won't even read what I write. Small not none.

And it sort of is in your best interest, especially since you would surely have NATO backing in something like that, unless you want a literal staging post for an English invasion by the Russians. And if you let them go that far, they will sure as hell go further. I'm sure they would love to get the Balkans back under their control. After all, going into a war with Russia isn't in your best interest if it's only a couple of little countries that far away. And better just let Hitler take Poland and France, after all it's not your problem.

Obviously the prospect of War with Russia in the near future is extremely unlikely in the present, but we don't know what state the world will be in, in 50 or 100 years time. The purpose of a military is not just to defend against current known threats, its to ensure we're prepared for unknown threats in the future.

Which is why, and I'll say it again, small not none.

There's also nothing to say the bulk of our military couldn't be part time or reservists, like most other small countiries. Noones invaded Luxembourg lately, for instance.

Co'tor Shas wrote:What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response?

Crimea says hi

Herzlos wrote:There's also nothing to say the bulk of our military couldn't be part time or reservists, like most other small countiries. Noones invaded Luxembourg lately, for instance.

Luxembourg is a Nato member surrounded by other Nato countries. So probably not the best example

GoatboyBeta wrote:

Co'tor Shas wrote:What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response?

Crimea says hi

Crimea was surrounded by Russia.

Scotland is 5,500 KM from Russia according to google. Not to mention the narrow Baltic sea and all those other countries in the way.

Scotland has as much to fear from Russia as it does from Crabmen.

GoatboyBeta wrote:

Co'tor Shas wrote:What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response?

Crimea says hi

To be fair, Scotland does not already host one of the largest Russian military installations, nor does it share a land border with Russia, nor does Scotland have large population segment welcoming to Russia, nor any great centuries long historical attachment to Russia, while Crimea had all of these, while Scotland does directly border a nuclear NATO power that would be...very uncomfortable with such action even if Scotland was independent and not part of NATO.


Not that Scotland should do any of these things...

Less of the "smartass" comments, please, guys!

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

GoatboyBeta wrote:

Co'tor Shas wrote:What, honestly, can Russia do to an independent Scotland without international response?

Crimea says hi

Crimea was surrounded by Russia.

Scotland is 5,500 KM from Russia according to google. Not to mention the narrow Baltic sea and all those other countries in the way.

Scotland has as much to fear from Russia as it does from Crabmen.

True(except the Crabmen part), guess I shouldn't have been so pithy. But Crimea and the ongoing mess in Ukraine are an example of why international rules are not worth the paper there printed on if your big enough and/or no one really gives a damn about the county your messing with. Sure the chances of Russia specifically invading an independent Scotland are slimmer then my lotto numbers coming up. But rules without the will or power to enforce them are worthless, because sooner or later some one will break them and respond with "So what are you gonna do about it?"

Edit- I'm sure I had a point around here somewhere, BRB
*makes quick exit*

Sentinel1 wrote:
Sliding into the realms of hypothetical thought, if Russia successfully invades a militarily incompetent EU and looks to finish the UK off, and independent Scotland could be our undoing. I doubt the SNP or whoever would increase military spending or update its inventory at all. As you say Russian jets could break Scottish Air Space and practically have control of the skies. If a strong Russia fleet had supremacy in the North Sea they could land Marine units and then launch a full scale invasion by island-hopping on the North of Scotland and moving South by keeping shipping covered in well defended lochs. It would be a back door left open to defeat England quickly. Now I seriously doubt such a doomsday event would come, but sharing a land border with a weak military state isn't the best of ideas in my books.

Honestly, if Russia ever decides to invade a militarily incompetent EU, the UK will be at best an afterthought. And independent Scotland just won't matter in that situation, especially with BAOR and BFG effectively gone. Just look at our current military strength, even considering that we're hardened by TELIC and HERICK, we're still completely dwarfed by the Russian military, we can deploy battalions against divisions. I agree that it's not likely to happen but if .the EU loses, we're done unless the US is going to bail us out.

To get back to current affairs, what does the panel think of the Chancellor's slightly vague plans to reform vocational secondary and tertiary education over the next few years?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To get back to current affairs, what does the panel think of the Chancellor's slightly vague plans to reform vocational secondary and tertiary education over the next few years?

Panel? I guess this thread is a lot like Question Time.