Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing?

Scroll to see replies

I have no time for the SNP and have huge problems with the campaign.

My god. Another person claiming not to support the SNP but wanting to vote yes. If there's so many SNP supporters wanting to vote yes and non SNP supporters wanting to vote yes, why is support so low?

Reply 5621

King Kebab

Original post by Midlander

I could go on, but it looks like he is promising virtually everything in order to win votes.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Naturally, he is a politician

Reply 5622

King Kebab

Original post by MatureStudent36

No idea?

Is support low?

Reply 5623

MatureStudent36

Original post by King Kebab

No idea?

Is support low?

Polls fluctuate, but the average since 2012 is about 32%.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

Here's one going back 30 odd years that shows the same story.

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/2935/35-years-of-Scottish-attitudes-towards-independence.aspx

Although go on any web forum and you'd be forgiven thinking its git popular support.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 5624

King Kebab

Original post by MatureStudent36

32% is not that low

"If there's so many SNP supporters wanting to vote yes and non SNP supporters wanting to vote yes, why is support so low?"

I don't understand this part

Reply 5625

Midlander

Original post by King Kebab

No, I don't generalize.

So why do you think an independent Scotland will be fairer? That to me is putting Scots on a pedestal above everyone else in the UK.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 5626

Midlander

Original post by King Kebab

Naturally, he is a politician

Why is it OK for him to do it and not David Cameron?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 5627

King Kebab

Original post by Midlander

Why is it OK for him to do it and not David Cameron?

Posted from TSR Mobile

I didn't say it was okay. I can't stand Mr Salmond.

Reply 5628

King Kebab

Original post by Midlander

So why do you think an independent Scotland will be fairer? That to me is putting Scots on a pedestal above everyone else in the UK.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Voting patterns.

My reasons for supporting independence have nothing to do with distinguishing between English and Scottish people.

I am actually in favor of a Federal model but that doesn't seem to be on the cards atm.

Reply 5629

Psyk

Original post by 1tartanarmy

Thats just wrong. Go find a source to your claims before talking nonsense.

I think he's completely correct. Scotland isn't a country in any sense that is relevant to international law. Isn't that what this whole independence thing is about?

Reply 5630

Midlander

Original post by King Kebab

The same voting which saw Labour in power for 13 years straight? Sometimes we don't get the government we vote for-that is a fact of life and does not have to be responded to by breaking away.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 5631

King Kebab

Original post by Midlander

I really don't understand the point you are making here?

Reply 5632

Midlander

Original post by King Kebab

I really don't understand the point you are making here?

You insinuate that Scotland always gets the government it doesn't want when clearly sometimes it does.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 5633

King Kebab

Original post by Midlander

You insinuate that Scotland always gets the government it doesn't want when clearly sometimes it does.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I didn't insinuate anything.

Reply 5634

Teaddict

I cannot tell if 1tartanarmy is a troll or just unable to engage in polite and rational debate

Reply 5635

cowsforsale

http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/politics/holyrood/the-gloves-are-coming-off-in-the-referendum-battle-1.187491

Thousands of people south of the Border have volunteered to try and persuade Scots to vote no in the independence referendum.

The pro-union Better Together campaign is setting up groups of people in England and Wales to operate “phone banks” to lobby the one million Scots the group has identified as undecided voters.

Maturestudent36? Midlander? Good Bloke? Scots issues left for those living in Scotland I see...

Reply 5636

cowsforsale

[video="youtube_share;rRipP5VhgZ0"]http://youtu.be/rRipP5VhgZ0?t=7m44s[/video]

Watch Douglas Alexander squirm his way out of guaranteeing more powers to Scotland in the event of a No vote..

Vote YES!

Reply 5637

L i b

Original post by 1tartanarmy

They will continue, it is just likely an independent Scotland would not be part of it. "Do No Harm" has been talked about in regards to foreign policy. I'm pretty sure going into foreign countries and dropping bombs is harmful. Thus an independent Scotland, as it would be in 2016, would not be in these wars.

With the EU, You attempt to add reason to the absence of such a provision without any back-up of facts. Where or whom has said that the reason such a policy doesn't exists is because Scotland would 'obviously' not be part of the EU? Which I of course disagree with. Come on, tell me where your facts come in that regard?

I have no idea what you're on about here. But Scotland ceases to be a member of such international organisations due to the basic provisions of international law, not as a result of EU law. International law governs how the treaties operate and who is party to them. That much should be obvious.

Where do my facts come from? Well, you can try reading the independent legal advice provided to the UK Government as part of the Scotland Analysis programme, or read some of the cases and opinions it references. A particularly good one is the Supreme Court of Canada's Reference in re: the secession of Quebec.

I'm under no illusions that you will, however. For you, this is not a legal debate. This is a debate whereby you think I'm somehow trying to suggest there are limitations on the power of an entity - the Nation - which you have imbued with quasi-Divine authority. Mine is a case of law and political practice - yours is a case of arguing anything, no matter how implausible, that fits with your bizarre sense of nationalistic pride.

The fact of the matter is that this has simply never been thought of, its such a unique situation that Scotland will likely be the first 'test case'.

Nonsense. There have been countless examples of where new states have emerged from existing states, and normal international practice is that they cease to be a member of international organisations automatically. This happened when Ireland became independent as the Free State in 1922 - although that is simply one example from many over decades.

It is an accepted and quite normal part of international law. That you don't understand international law isn't really my problem. I suppose I should start having arguments with people who have at least a kernel of knowledge about what they are seeking to pontificate on.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 5638

MatureStudent36

Original post by cowsforsale

http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/politics/holyrood/the-gloves-are-coming-off-in-the-referendum-battle-1.187491

Maturestudent36? Midlander? Good Bloke? Scots issues left for those living in Scotland I see...

So we'll be seeing you berate Sean Connery, Alan Cummings, Irvin Welsh and this motley crew whenever they rear their heads.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2545901/Cybernats-unmasked-Meet-footsoldiers-pro-Scottish-independence-army-online-poison-shames-Nationalists.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Reply 5639

Old_Simon

Original post by L i b

There is nothing more harmful than doing nothing when regimes murder and slaughter their own people, threaten war against other countries and violate their international obligations.

That something "has been talked about" is meaningless.

And so, Scottish soldiers would not continue to be a part of it. Thats simply the likely scenario with an independent Scotland as it stands.

I have no idea what you're on about here. But Scotland ceases to be a member of such international organisations due to the basic provisions of international law, not as a result of EU law. International law governs how the treaties operate and who is party to them. That much should be obvious.

Where do my facts come from? Well, you can try reading the independent legal advice provided to the UK Government as part of the Scotland Analysis programme, or read some of the cases and opinions it references. A particularly good one is the Supreme Court of Canada's Reference in re: the secession of Quebec.

I'm under no illusions that you will, however. For you, this is not a legal debate. This is a debate whereby you think I'm somehow trying to suggest there are limitations on the power of an entity - the Nation - which you have imbued with quasi-Divine authority. Mine is a case of law and political practice - yours is a case of arguing anything, no matter how implausible, that fits with your bizarre sense of nationalistic pride.

Nonsense. There have been countless examples of where new states have emerged from existing states, and normal international practice is that they cease to be a member of international organisations automatically. This happened when Ireland became independent as the Free State in 1922 - although that is simply one example from many over decades.

It is an accepted and quite normal part of international law. That you don't understand international law isn't really my problem. I suppose I should start having arguments with people who have at least a kernel of knowledge about what they are seeking to pontificate on.