Scotland can't do referendums any time they want

If they want another referendum, I say it's only fair to let them have it. They voted to remain part of a UK in the EU. Circumstances have changed now that the UK is leaving the EU. Besides, the EU might not necessarily accept an independent Scotland and it would be hilarious if they left the UK to remain part of an EU which subsequently rejected them.

What is it they wanted to do? ( not sure which part you're talking about. )
And secondly, I'm highly doubtful they would have done that, if anything they would have only used it as leverage so Westminster don't block another independence referendum. Though, seems like they can't do that now because apparently Westminster don't need Scottish parliaments permission to leave.

don't scotland have to be richer?

The SNP originally wanted to block/veto the UK leaving the EU. That's the SNP implicitly stating they are happy for the English to suffer a result they didn't vote for, even though they're crying about the exact situation happening to them. The Scottish cry about Tory governance being 'forced' on them, but given the chance they'd jump at a left-wing government being forced on England. There are so many scenarios that expose Scottish hypocrisy that many English have stopped caring for their tantrums.

Well, Alex Salmond had argued that in order to vote to leave the EU, the way of voting should be that every country in the UK votes to leave or it doesn't happen. That would have been good. But like I said, they wouldn't veto it, Infact likely that was a misinterpretation.

*Welcome to our world, we get a government we did not elect, we get dragged out the EU against our wishes, why shouldn't we try everything we can in order to stay in? And given the chance the SNP would rather be independent from the UK anyway so saying they'd rather England got a left-wing government isn't true, we'd rather not be in the UK at all.

That's specifically what Nicola Sturgeon claimed she was looking at doing. There is no misinterpretation. It was only dashed when it becomes apparent that Scotland did not have the power to do so. She has no objections to a country being forced to do something against it's will, she only objects when it happens specifically to Scotland.



So will any regions that vote against independence be allowed to stay in the UK? Why should they be dragged out against their will? Where does it end? Should each individual house be allowed to opt in and out and choose it's own country? What about the millions of voters in rural England that suffered through 13 years of Labour government they didn't vote for? Where's the crocodile tears for them? No one in Northern Ireland voted for either Labour or Tory government, why aren't they throwing tantrums?
Independence is a valid goal to aspire for, but to do it because you're unhappy over a legitimate democratic election result is stupid, especially when you'd have no qualms if the result went the other way.

That's specifically what Nicola Sturgeon claimed she was looking at doing. There is no misinterpretation. It was only dashed when it becomes apparent that Scotland did not have the power to do so. She has no objections to a country being forced to do something against it's will, she only objects when it happens specifically to Scotland.



So will any regions that vote against independence be allowed to stay in the UK? Why should they be dragged out against their will? Where does it end? Should each individual house be allowed to opt in and out and choose it's own country? What about the millions of voters in rural England that suffered through 13 years of Labour government they didn't vote for? Where's the crocodile tears for them? No one in Northern Ireland voted for either Labour or Tory government, why aren't they throwing tantrums?
Independence is a valid goal to aspire for, but to do it because you're unhappy over a legitimate democratic election result is stupid, especially when you'd have no qualms if the result went the other way.

If it becomes apparently through a legitimate democratic results that Scottish people have significantly different aspirations from the rest of the UK then that becomes perfectly valid grounds to aspire to eindependence.

The clear different between Scotland an a random council area in England is that Scotland have been an independent country in the not-too-distant past and already has it's own parliament with devolved powers. The proportion of people in Scotland who consider themselves Scottish yet not truly British is much greater than the proportion of people in, for instance, Birmingham who consider themselves citizens of Birmingham but not British.

Is London a country? It's NOT. Scotland is its own country, with its own traditions, its own government. Do NOT treat us as a region, you're acting like medieval England, basically Edward I.*

And have you listened to Sinn Fein? They're after reuniting Ireland post Brexit.

And Scotland did not vote for Brexit, Scotland did not vote for the Conservatives so really, is this proper democracy? It's democracy for England, not for Scotland, we are outnumbered and are so politically different. Anyway, what's your problem with the SNP? You complain Scotland would veto England's vote for Brexit then you say we're moaning about the result, would you prefer Scotland to leave the UK or stay?

* Secondly, Scotland would NOT veto, Sturgeon said she was "exploring it" and the SNP decided against it.

A random council area? I'm talking about entire regions of the country, like East Anglia for example.*
Every vote reveals two or more sides with significantly different aspirations. My point is Scotland only seems to give a toss when they lose. If England was forced to stay in the EU based on Scotland's vote, no one in Scotland would bat an eyelid. What's the betting that Anglia, Kent and Lincolnshire don't rant and whine and throw tantrums if they get a Labour government they didn't vote for in 2020?
You can't complain about a specific situation if you're happy with it happening in principle.

Arguing that all Brits should be treated fairly and that Scots should not be given special treatment is the equivalent of being a military conqueror? Right, gotcha.




They've been after reuniting Ireland long before the Brexit vote too. It still doesn't change the fact that unionist parties have a majority in the NI Assembly and the DUP backed Brexit.



Find me a democratic system where every single person is happy with the result at all times. You can find a large block of people in many arbitrary geographical locations who people did not vote for the current government. That doesn't make it 'not democracy'. Democracy isn't about you specifically getting your way all the time, it's about getting a say in the process.
My problem with the SNP? I've already said, they're constant whining and tantrums about things they'd happily do themselves if they had the chance.




Exploring if it was possible. It isn't. That's why it was dropped, it isn't legally possible. That doesn't change the fact that she'd happily enforce a situation on England that she whines about is happening to Scotland.*

No, I'm saying that Edward I treated Scotland as a region and not a country. And yes, Scotland should be treated in someway different to the county of Cambridgeshire because we are not a county, we are a country with 5 million in population and our own devolved government.

See, that's different to Scotland, isn't it? Every leading party in Scotland supported remain, compared to DUP in NI who supported leave.

I know that democracy means not everybody is happy, when I voted in this years election, none of the candidates I voted for became MSP's and I was sad about that but I wasn't in the majority and that was okay. I am in the majority in Scotland who support remain in Scotland because over 60% of the country voted for it. Every single council in Scotland voted to remain, we are our own country and we were basically vetoed by the United Kingdom, we don't seem to matter. We have a good reason to complain, we didn't vote for leave and we are being taken away from our main trading partners!

And like I have already said,
1- We didn't vote for this, 2/4 of the U.K. voted for it.
2- So what? She acts in Scotland's interests, Scotland's interest is to stay in. ( don't say she doesn't because she was democratically elected. )
3- If England stayed against their will, I don't think they'd be so pleased.

Agreed. And in the 2016 Scottish elections a majority of voters voted for unionist parties.

No, Scotland should not be treated differently. You can't just say that you guys are special because you were independent three centuries ago.
5 million is nothing, there are more people in almost every English region, and it's pretty easily to characterise these regions as well by their political affiliation and how they voted in the Brexit referendum, just like Scotland. The entire country is extremely polarised, it isn't a Scottish only phenomenon. In a straight up choice between two things, literally half the country is going to get 'vetoed' and ignored.
The same situation will happen in an independent Scotland. What happens if the Lowlands don't vote the same way as the Highlands? Will you split up into two smaller countries?

The difference is, the English seem to accept this principle. If England stayed in the EU against their will, of course we wouldn't be pleased, but we wouldn't talk of seeking ways to negate the referendum, or dissolving the union or kicking Scotland out. I couldn't care less frankly if Scotland does become independent, but the argument that you should on the grounds of 'democracy' is pure waffle.

No, Scotland should not be treated differently. You can't just say that you guys are special because you were independent three centuries ago.

Scotland would be wise to wait and see what happens to Europe, that's even they are even allowed to be readmitted if independent. And what the hell currency would they use?

Scotland has always been treated differently and given a special status within the UK for as long as it's been part of it, even before devolution. It was a separate legal jurisdiction with different laws, even when it lacked separate legislative powers. The Anglican Church is not established in Scotland, nor has it ever been. Scotland has always had separate and slightly different education and monetary/banking systems. This is the case precisely because of the way Great Britain, later the UK, was formed - as a formal union of two separate states, with certain terms and conditions applying.

I know that. I'm clearly not talking about regional variations in the banking system. I never said the British state is uniform across the country. The layman doesn't care about what church is established north of the border. They do however care about the SNP's notion that democracy is 8% of the UK population being able to veto the wishes of the other 92%.

So will any regions that vote against independence be allowed to stay in the UK? Why should they be dragged out against their will? Where does it end?

The same situation will happen in an independent Scotland. What happens if the Lowlands don't vote the same way as the Highlands? Will you split up into two smaller countries?