Convict
Senior T20I Player
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2012
- Runs
- 19,169
- Post of the Week
- 4
so what if the No vote wins? shouldn't we accept that he is British even though he may have voted yes? I will still support him.
He obviously doesn't see himself as British
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
so what if the No vote wins? shouldn't we accept that he is British even though he may have voted yes? I will still support him.
He obviously doesn't see himself as British
That's called settler-colonialism; it's a good idea imo but many Punjabi and Sindhi settlers were killed in B'stan a few years back.If Scottish could not leave their distinct national posture even when they had better rights and opportunities as citizens then how long it will take people in Indian held Kashmir or Baluchistan to present an even more formidable challenge ?
I think the best way to neutralize this danger is settlements of other races in these areas. A stage may come when people won't get satisfied with little concessions.
If Scottish could not leave their distinct national posture even when they had better rights and opportunities as citizens then how long it will take people in Indian held Kashmir or Baluchistan to present an even more formidable challenge ?
I think the best way to neutralize this danger is settlements of other races in these areas. A stage may come when people won't get satisfied with little concessions.
You mean West Bank?Isn't this what Israel is trying to do in Gaza?
Isn't this what Israel is trying to do in Gaza?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
You mean West Bank?
Well, thank goodness that the smarter heads prevailed.
The Fear of the unknown prevailed, i think.
Sure, in that Salmond had no answer on a number of questions about currency, economy, health care and defence.
The Scots have been prudent and avoided the dodgy-looking bait.
I don't know whether this is good news or bad news, but i am impressed by the process. This reminds me of Quebec ala separate nation or join Canada. Both Pakistan and India needs to do the same with Kashmir. Let Kashmir decides whether it wants to be independent or merge with Pakistan/India in the similar process.
I don't know whether this is good news or bad news, but i am impressed by the process. This reminds me of Quebec ala separate nation or join Canada. Both Pakistan and India needs to do the same with Kashmir. Let Kashmir decides whether it wants to be independent or merge with Pakistan/India in the similar process.
I think not enough broadcasts of "Braveheart" in the last few days, was the main reason of defeat
Btw: Congratulations on preserving the Union
I think the Scots have done well out of this. They will have greater powers devolved to them. The West Lothian MP can still vote on English affiars, while the Blackpool MP still cannot vote on Scottish affairs. And they are still covered by the British defence umbrella.
I think the Scots have done well out of this. They will have greater powers devolved to them. The West Lothian MP can still vote on English affiars, while the Blackpool MP still cannot vote on Scottish affairs. And they are still covered by the British defence umbrella.
Telegraph reported that Tories are going to push for that only England MPs can vote on England affairs- be interesting that! Labours going to oppose than vehemently.
We could do without the 'British Defence Umbrella'. I am disgusted at the way we go around the World, piggy backing on the USA and invading countries which have nothing to do with us.
This was one of the major reason why I voted YES.
I despise the UK for going to war in my name.

It's a No.
Almost every county had a majority No. Bit of a surprise, and deeply embarrassing for the SNP.
Time for Salmond to get off our screens and resign.
I favour a model where there is greater and greater devolution between regions of the UK. We keep Westminster to manage all the collective issues such as defence, comms and transport. The Scots, Northern Irish, Welsh and English have their own assemblies. The English Assembly could move to Birmingham, being more central.

)They choose money over principle, dependence over independence, gave into threats and intimidation. Nothing more to be said. Pathetic
Scotland should be pretty embarrassed.
The only country to have independence literally handed to them and they turned it down
Scotland the Brave my foot)
Wouldnt have minded this result if it wasnt for the pathetically biased news coverage in favour of the "No" side. This comment kinda sums it up for me
I feel for the sporting fans there. They will never ever be able to live this one down! The Six Nations anthems between Scotland and England at Murrayfield will be hilarious to watch
they scared them shittless into believing they would struggle on their own.
)looks like majority does not want freedom.
Not at all, how is it independence if you retain the pound and have your monetary policy dictated by the Bank of England ?Scotland should be pretty embarrassed.
The only country to have independence literally handed to them and they turned it down
Scotland the Brave my foot)
Errrrr.... they have freedom. I argue that they have more freedom that the English, because of their Holyrood assembly.
The Scots are a clever folk and the majority realised that Salmond didn't know what he was doing on the hard issues of currency, EU membership and defence. They would have turned into another Republic of Ireland, Spain or Greece in a decade, with their economy tanking, unable to raise enough tax to pay for their health care and social services, and relying on England for defence.
In the end they would have been less free than they are now.
Errrrr.... they have freedom. I argue that they have more freedom that the English, because of their Holyrood assembly.
The Scots are a clever folk and the majority realised that Salmond didn't know what he was doing on the hard issues of currency, EU membership and defence. They would have turned into another Republic of Ireland, Spain or Greece in a decade, with their economy tanking, unable to raise enough tax to pay for their health care and social services, and relying on England for defence.
In the end they would have been less free than they are now.
The entire NO campaign revolved around using fear to bring the Scottish to their kneesthey scared them shittless into believing they would struggle on their own.
Can't wait to see Andy Murray at Wimbledon)
Scottish economy and their plans towards EU had nothing to do with those of Ireland, Spain or Greece. You are just building a strawman to justify the existence of the UK, as did the no-campaigners. It's funny how everyone pretends to have critical thinking and objectivity regarding the world's matters but, when it comes to their backdoor, they have the same prejudices and fogged reasoning as anyone else.
looks like more non brits wanted to see scots vote yes than actual scots, lols.
justify the existance of the uk? the uk isnt an imposition, whether it be the falklands, or scotland, every recent referendum has shown the uk exists because those who are part of it believe in it.
it was the objectivity and critical thinking of the scots that won the case for the union, contrary to the image of poor simpleton scots, scared into submission by the establishment, those who wanted a yes vote might like to portray.
looks like more non brits wanted to see scots vote yes than actual scots, lols.
justify the existance of the uk? the uk isnt an imposition, whether it be the falklands, or scotland, every recent referendum has shown the uk exists because those who are part of it believe in it.
it was the objectivity and critical thinking of the scots that won the case for the union, contrary to the image of poor simpleton scots, scared into submission by the establishment, those who wanted a yes vote might like to portray.
looks like more non brits wanted to see scots vote yes than actual scots, lols.
justify the existance of the uk? the uk isnt an imposition, whether it be the falklands, or scotland, every recent referendum has shown the uk exists because those who are part of it believe in it.
it was the objectivity and critical thinking of the scots that won the case for the union, contrary to the image of poor simpleton scots, scared into submission by the establishment, those who wanted a yes vote might like to portray.

looks like more non brits wanted to see scots vote yes than actual scots, lols.
justify the existance of the uk? the uk isnt an imposition, whether it be the falklands, or scotland, every recent referendum has shown the uk exists because those who are part of it believe in it.
it was the objectivity and critical thinking of the scots that won the case for the union, contrary to the image of poor simpleton scots, scared into submission by the establishment, those who wanted a yes vote might like to portray.
Total bs the whole campaign revolved around getting the Scottish to shitt their pants through the use of emotional lingo e.g heartbreak, divorce, torn apart etc critical thinking my foot they were frightened, many are already regretting that they voted NO
Total bs the whole campaign revolved around getting the Scottish to shitt their pants through the use of emotional lingo e.g heartbreak, divorce, torn apart etc critical thinking my foot they were frightened, many are already regretting that they voted NO
looks like more non brits wanted to see scots vote yes than actual scots, lols.
justify the existance of the uk? the uk isnt an imposition, whether it be the falklands, or scotland, every recent referendum has shown the uk exists because those who are part of it believe in it.
it was the objectivity and critical thinking of the scots that won the case for the union, contrary to the image of poor simpleton scots, scared into submission by the establishment, those who wanted a yes vote might like to portray.
The UK is a country stuck in the past and a disruptive force to the european construction. I wanted scots to vote yes and I have no shame in admitting it.
Some english people here are saying that Scotland would be in the same position as Greece if they were independent and I am the one who thinks Scots are simpletons who can't fend for themselves?
It has been proven time and time again in Europe that the most prospering nations are the smaller ones with decentralized decision making (especially if ressource rich)
Many of the problems with spain and greece stem from not enough europe rather than too much europe.
Business leaders and campaigners are being intimidated because of their pro-Union views, the Telegraph can disclose. Dozens of Scottish businesses have been subjected to bullying, threats and abuse after publicly questioning independence. Several company directors said that they had received messages threatening to attack their families or boycott their business.
“My wife was upset by what people were saying on the internet [after they came out in support of the Union]," said Alistair Macmillan, a signatory to a pro-Union letter and managing director at White House Productions Ltd. “They were threatening to boycott the business, attack me, attack us”.
“No” campaigners have also faced abuse while they have been canvassing. A partially sighted pensioner, who asked not to be named, said he was punched in the face by a Yes supporter as he handed out leaflets for Better Together in Glasgow. “I was standing at a No station when two young men, aged in their 20s came up to me,” said the 75-year-old man.
“I was talking to one of them normally, but then absolutely out of the blue the other just swung a punch at my head. "I was a bit shocked and fell slightly backwards. I carry a white stick because I am half blind – they would have seen that.”
Huge row developing. We have a bizarre situation where English MPs cannot vote on Scottish/Welsh/NI issues but the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish can vote on English issues.
Cameron wants this West Lothian Question resolved alongside further Scottish devolution, yet the deadline is extremely tight with an election next spring. Tory backbenchers will not allow devo max with resolution to this question. It would impact Labour as they have 41 Scottish MPs - so we could have a scenario where if we do have "English votes for English laws" and that non-English MPs are barred from voting on English matters - a Labour govt with a UK majority but unable to pass bills due to a English Tory majority.
The UK is a country stuck in the past and a disruptive force to the european construction.
Some english people here are saying that Scotland would be in the same position as Greece if they were independent and I am the one who thinks Scots are simpletons who can't fend for themselves?
It has been proven time and time again in Europe that the most prospering nations are the smaller ones with decentralized decision making (especially if ressource rich) as far as social and cultural services are concerned while being under the european/nato umbrella for foreign policy and defense. Many of the problems with spain and greece stem from not enough europe rather than too much europe.
That would be true in a single English Assembly model.
What about four such Assemblies - London/Home Counties, West, Midlands and North? Then the traditional Labour areas would have better representation. London/Home Counties would be hardcore Tory in perpetuity, of course.
That would be true in a single English Assembly model.
What about four such Assemblies - London/Home Counties, West, Midlands and North? Then the traditional Labour areas would have better representation. London/Home Counties would be hardcore Tory in perpetuity, of course.
The UK is a country stuck in the past and a disruptive force to the european construction.
at least you'll admit theres something good about the UK then![]()
well if they didn't have any control over interest rates or matters of currency, they would have been. its not a slight on the scots, just a statement of fact.
agree completely, which is why scotland and all regions of the uk should be devolved within a federal uk.
lols, poor southern europeans cant run a country, need the folks in Brussels to show them how.
I actually love the english. They have of lot of auto-derision, which tends to come in handy when you screw up as much as they do.

You are saying that like Scots currently have control over the sterling's interest rates.
Why within a federal UK? What's the point of entertaining a shell of a nation in the context of the EU?

He said while advocating for Westminster to help Scotland not become the next Greece.
The Fear of the unknown prevailed, i think.
Sure, in that Salmond had no answer on a number of questions about currency, economy, health care and defence.
The Scots have been prudent and avoided the dodgy-looking bait.
Until the last second, I was still 50-50 but in the end I voted No. It wasn't because I thought Scotland needed the UK or because I was bullied into it. It was simply a case of SNP and Alex Salmond were not able to convince me that they would be able to improve Scotland and make it a better place. A lot of people just needed a better leader to rally behind, and they would have voted Yes. A leader who could give solid answers for what the future would be for an independent Scotland rather than if's and but's. Scotland no doubt has the potential to prosper, but you need the correct leadership to prosper - Pakistan is a prime example of this. My head just wouldn't allow me to plunge Scotland into that uncertain future due to a spur of the moment passionate decision.
What's wrong with Alex Salmond
As an outsider i thought he put his heart and soul into it but at the end of the day Scotland isn't ready for independence nor has there been traditionally any huge clamour for a referendum
Tbf i'm not even sure why the Edinburgh agreement was first agreed upon
[MENTION=132254]chacha[/MENTION] kasmiri - exactly! He was very passionate and if it wasn't for him the Yes campaign didn't stand a chance. There's no doubting how genuinely he felt about the campaign, but as [MENTION=190]OZGOD[/MENTION] mentioned he just didn't seem to have the answers that mattered. It was very much a case of "trust me it will work out" - and maybe it would have worked out, but to me and many others that was way to big a gamble to put on one man.I only listened to a few speeches by Salmond but I thought he had a lot of charisma and was probably largely responsible for galvanising the Yes campaign to the point that they got to. But like Barack Obama, I think that when push came to shove he was long on rhetoric and short on details.

SNP to launch a new drive for independence, says Nicola Sturgeon
A fresh drive for Scottish independence will be launched by the SNP this summer as the party seeks to capitalise on its popularity and win over a significant portion of those who voted No in 2014, Nicola Sturgeon has announced.
In a speech to her party's spring conference in Glasgow, the First Minister dramatically reopened the issue of Scotland's future in the United Kingdom by promising to “embark on a new initiative to build support for independence” after the EU referendum in June.
The grassroots campaign will be aimed primarily at so-called “soft No voters” who were willing to be persuaded of the benefits of independence at the 2014 referendum but remained unconvinced by polling day, SNP sources told The Independent on Sunday. It is likely to feature a national tour by Ms Sturgeon, who remains extremely popular in Scotland.
The First Minister stressed that the drive would “not be an attempt to browbeat anyone” who is still staunchly in favour of the Union, but would instead take the form of a national conversation on the subject. The announcement earned her an immediate standing ovation from the 3,500 SNP supporters gathered in the main conference hall.
“I know that many across Scotland support the Union as strongly as we do independence – I respect that,” Ms Sturgeon said. “But I also know that many wanted to be persuaded in 2014, but ultimately didn't find our arguments compelling enough. So we will listen to what you have to say.
“We will hear your concerns and address your questions, and in the process, we will be prepared to challenge some of our own answers. And, patiently and respectfully, we will seek to convince you that independence really does offer the best future for Scotland.”
Describing independence as a “beautiful dream”, the First Minister added: “Our success will depend on the strength of our arguments and the clarity of our vision. It will mean convincing the people of this country that independence is right, not for yesterday's world, but for the complex, challenging and increasingly interdependent world that we live in today.”
The SNP's strategists believe they only need to convince around 15 per cent of wavering Scots to back independence to be confident of winning a second referendum, having secured 45 per cent of the national vote in 2014 from a much lower starting point. Recent opinion polls on the subject show that the country is still divided down the middle on the issue.
The new drive will be funded entirely by the SNP, to avoid accusations that the party is using Scottish taxpayers' money to bring about the break-up of the Union. Campaigning is unlikely to begin before July, so it does not interfere with the build up to May's Scottish Parliament election and the EU referendum in June.
The announcement will go some way to placating those SNP supporters who are keen for the party to push for a second referendum as soon as possible, but will also leave it open to criticism that it is obsessed with the issue of independence.
Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson said the new campaign proved that the SNP “just isn't prepared to let this go”, while Scottish Labour said the economic case for leaving the Union was “dead” due to the collapse in the price of North Sea oil. “Most Scots don't want to go through another referendum,” a spokesman added.
Scottish independence: Referendum results in pictures
With less than two months until the Holyrood election – at which the SNP is expected to achieve a comfortably majority – Ms Sturgeon also used her speech to outline the detail of several policies. The most significant was a pledge to channel more money into schools through reforms to the council tax, in an attempt to close the so-called “attainment gap” between rich and poor pupils.
Around £100 million a year will be raised by making Scots who live in larger homes pay more in tax to local authorities, with this cash going “direct to head teachers”, she said. Over the lifetime of the next parliament £750m will be pumped into the Scottish Government's Attainment Fund, which will be extended to all parts of Scotland.
David Cameron, the Prime Minister, has previously rejected suggestions that the Scottish nationalists should be entitled to hold a second independence referendum during this parliament. Referring to the 2014 referendum, he said: “I think it is important that a referendum is legal and properly constituted and that is what we had, and it was decisive, so I do not see the need for another one.”
Oil’s collapse blows a hole in Scotland’s finances
f Scotland had voted to leave the UK in the 2014 referendum, it would be a fortnight away from the target date the Scottish National Party set for independence. Many Scottish taxpayers may be breathing a sigh of relief when they look at the latest snapshot of the country’s finances.
Scotland’s notional budget deficit widened to 9.7 per cent of gross domestic product in the latest fiscal year, more than twice that of the UK as a whole. Government spending per person remained some £1,400 higher than the UK average. Tax revenues per person — which have historically offset higher spending — fell below the UK average for the first time in three decades, as the contribution from North Sea oil and gas revenues evaporated.
The collapse in oil prices, which have fallen much further since the period these figures cover, has exposed the flimsy foundations of the SNP’s case for fiscal autonomy. Before the referendum, the SNP argued that Scotland could afford independence on the basis of forecasts for North Sea tax receipts in a range of £4.2bn to £10.7bn in 2016-17. The latest projections for the same period range from £0.5bn to £2.8bn, with no prospect of improvement.
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, has sought to downplay the significance of one year’s figures. These forecasts, however, were always over-optimistic. Moreover, it was always clear that the volatility of oil prices would make it preferable for an independent Scotland to invest North Sea revenues rather than relying on them to fund current expenditure. In any case, Scotland’s onshore revenues are also growing more slowly than the UK average, partly due to demographics.
A deficit of this size is manageable but it is clear that an independent Scotland — which would surely face higher borrowing costs — would need to increase taxes or cut spending to put its finances on a sustainable footing.
Against this backdrop, the SNP has been understandably wary of spelling out how it plans next year to use the new powers on tax and welfare spending that were promised ahead of the referendum. Instead, it has negotiated a fiscal settlement that will protect Scotland’s funding arrangements with the UK for a further six years.
In the run-up to Scotland’s parliamentary elections on May 5, the SNP will have to at least sketch out its intentions. From next year, the Scottish government will have latitude to set income tax rates and bands. This presents the Scots with a conundrum: they do not want to increase taxes on low earners but will struggle to impose higher rates on the wealthy without triggering an exodus to London.
Yet since it is to acquire these powers, the SNP must decide whether to use them to mitigate the effect of benefit cuts planned at a UK level. Given greater discretion over a relatively generous welfare system, it will have to decide whether it can afford longstanding pledges to increase allowances for carers and childcare.
Scottish nationalists are still bitter at the tactics used by the pro-Union campaign in 2014. But Project Fear — the argument that Scotland faced an uncertain, impoverished future outside the UK — worked because the SNP failed to spell out alternatives. The latest figures suggest that the so-called scaremongering was well-founded.
The SNP may face little opposition in May. However, if Britain votes to leave the EU in the Brexit referendum, the question of Scotland’s future could be reopened. If the SNP wants its goal of independence to remain credible, it will have to detail plans to set public finances on a more sustainable path.
Nicola Sturgeon has confirmed she will ask for permission to hold a second referendum on Scottish independence.
Ms Sturgeon said she wanted a vote to be held between the autumn of 2018 and the spring of the following year.
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION], there is a contradiction encapsulated within your views.
You want the UK to exit the EU and simply trade with it on a free trade basis (okay, so do I!)
But you advocate for Scotland to remain under the UK umbrella?
......................................
Won't Theresa May just tell Nicky Sturgeon to bog off?