Scotland Debate

[Old Skier]

Before that maybe you might answer the question I asked of you and may others.

That is of course if you actually have an answer for it of course.

I'll have one of what your drinking. It's been answered a few times, just read the thread.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Before that maybe you might answer the question I asked of you and many others.

That is of course if you actually have an answer for it of course.

I answered

 

[Old Skier]

I answered

We all have many times but as is the norm with the Yes delegate, if they don't like the answer they ignore it.

 

[Foxholer]

Ironically that is not always true as New Labour was re-elected twice on the strength of Scotland's votes when English votes alone would have given a different result.

Apologies! Should have stated 'the present incumbents of Westminster' in there somewhere. I believe the populace of Scotland is vehemently anti Tory and moderately anti Westminster, while the SNP is distinctly more anti Westminster - or at least more pro self governing!

@Dodger It's definitely easier to argue the positives about the benefits of any change - and many of them are often not truly quantifiable either - at least from a cost perspective. It's actually quite difficult to argue the benefits of 'no change'. And this applies to anything, whether it be the other half's wardrobe, changes to a house, or a country's independence! In the case of independence, the cost of making and passing laws and the infrastructure to implement and apply them - including a vastly increased Civil Service - is one example of the sort of things that haven't been highlighted. The loss of a joint approach to Trade is another, pretty non-quantifiable, one. How much these things matter is a different question, but there are plenty of things that the BT folk should be broadcasting.

 

[Dodger]

I'll have one of what your drinking. It's been answered a few times, just read the thread.

I have not read the whole thread and certainly not doing 75 pages back so give me yours in a summary please.

Thanks.

 

[Old Skier]

The summary was in 1499 but the sentiment is similar to Phils a couple above that. Hope that helps now perhaps you will answer the question raised in that post.

 

[Old Skier]

"Barrhead Travel is yet another example of an employer in Scotland saying that being part of the UK is better for their business. Having access to a single UK market of sixty three million people, rather than five million, means Scotland's firms have more opportunities to thrive and employ more people. Where is the sense in putting a barrier between Scottish businesses and their customers elsewhere in the UK?


"Businesses still aren't being told what would replace the Pound and how we would get back into the EU or on what terms. Asking Scotland's employers to hope that it will be alright on the night isn't good enough.


"Being part of the UK means we can have the best of both worlds - a strong Scottish Parliament, with the guarantee of more powers, backed up by the strength, security and stability of being part of the larger UK. Independence puts that at risk.


"Barrhead Travel is a real Scottish success story to be proud of. The nationalists' response to the company saying they want to stay part of the UK is a new low. This is the worst type of negative politics from Yes campaigners."

 

[Deleted member 18588]

So it was the 30 odd Scottish votes that won the day and not the 250 odd English ones. Get real.

I would suggest that you look at the results of the 2001 & 2005 General Elections but then I realise that you don't do facts, only prejudices.

 

[Dodger]

The summary was in 1499 but the sentiment is similar to Phils a couple above that. Hope that helps now perhaps you will answer the question raised in that post.

Nice cop out. Thanks.:thup:

 

[Val]

"Barrhead Travel is yet another example of an employer in Scotland saying that being part of the UK is better for their business. Having access to a single UK market of sixty three million people, rather than five million, means Scotland's firms have more opportunities to thrive and employ more people. Where is the sense in putting a barrier between Scottish businesses and their customers elsewhere in the UK?


"Businesses still aren't being told what would replace the Pound and how we would get back into the EU or on what terms. Asking Scotland's employers to hope that it will be alright on the night isn't good enough.


"Being part of the UK means we can have the best of both worlds - a strong Scottish Parliament, with the guarantee of more powers, backed up by the strength, security and stability of being part of the larger UK. Independence puts that at risk.


"Barrhead Travel is a real Scottish success story to be proud of. The nationalists' response to the company saying they want to stay part of the UK is a new low. This is the worst type of negative politics from Yes campaigners."

Now, I said weeks ago about major businesses showing hands in the NO camp, Barrhead are not what I would call a major business but a substantial enough business. There are plenty to follow soon enough.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

As someone who had to go skip across the wall to clear and sort out your rubbish, help bury your dead and crap myself whilst I fought your fires I am at a lose to understand why the noisey minority are so determined to drive a wedge between the Union. The only argument I hear is that you are all p*ssed of with Westminster, well as strange as it may seem, so are the rest off us.

Perhaps someone could tell me in all honesty what this is really all about and how will the nationalist and republicans react if, as seems likely there is a No vote.

Unless you're of an age to have fought in WWI or WWII, I seriously doubt you've fought in any war in my name, whether it was Falklands,Iraq,Afghanistan.So whilst I commend your bravery and admire your desire to serve queen and country, please don't think you had an obligation to fight any of those wars,legal or not, in my name.If you take offense to that, so be it, but that's a fact and I know i'm not alone.

And you may well be pissed off with Westminster, you may well want to remove yourself from their tyranny, but you can't and we can.

And the answer is self determination, the ability to be accountable, to be represented correctly internationally, to be held accountable for decisions and choices we make that reflect our country and out citizens.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Unless you're of an age to have fought in WWI or WWII, I seriously doubt you've fought in any war in my name, whether it was Falklands,Iraq,Afghanistan.So whilst I commend your bravery and admire your desire to serve queen and country, please don't think you had an obligation to fight any of those wars,legal or not, in my name.If you take offense to that, so be it, but that's a fact and I know i'm not alone.

And you may well be pissed off with Westminster, you may well want to remove yourself from their tyranny, but you can't and we can.

And the answer is self determination, the ability to be accountable, to be represented correctly internationally, to be held accountable for decisions and choices we make that reflect our country and out citizens.

They were all done in the name of the UK - whether you agree with them or not.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

Now, I said weeks ago about major businesses showing hands in the NO camp, Barrhead are not what I would call a major business but a substantial enough business. There are plenty to follow soon enough.

I know Bill Munro well, I know his thoughts and have debated this with him.I respect his decision to air his views...I'd never think about doing the same for my firm, but he's made his choice and he'll stand behind it.How it works out for him, I'm not sure, but I refuse to make any kind of commercial gain from this episode.Personally, I think he's made a big mistake and have told him so today...the nationalists are significantly more vocal and 'partisan' than the unionsists

 

[Adi2Dassler]

They were all done in the name of the UK - whether you agree with them or not.

And in some cases, against the backdrop of huge public opposition, but I'll not comment on this again as it serves no purpose.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

And in some cases, against the backdrop of huge public opposition, but I'll not comment on this again as it serves no purpose.

Always going to be public opposition regardless of the situation.

But the guys were still doing their job as requested and under the banner of the UK forces,

 

[Val]

I know Bill Munro well, I know his thoughts and have debated this with him.I respect his decision to air his views...I'd never think about doing the same for my firm, but he's made his choice and he'll stand behind it.How it works out for him, I'm not sure, but I refuse to make any kind of commercial gain from this episode.Personally, I think he's made a big mistake and have told him so today...the nationalists are significantly more vocal and 'partisan' than the unionsists

The only firms who will show their hand are those who's businesses will not be affected by showing their hand, it will be interesting to see if firms like Aberdeen Assett Management who are now a well known respected proud Scottish business show their hands and the longer they take to do so the more likely they will be in the NO camp which I'm sure they will be.

 

[stevie_r]

Unless you're of an age to have fought in WWI or WWII, I seriously doubt you've fought in any war in my name, whether it was Falklands,Iraq,Afghanistan.So whilst I commend your bravery and admire your desire to serve queen and country, please don't think you had an obligation to fight any of those wars,legal or not, in my name.If you take offense to that, so be it, but that's a fact and I know i'm not alone.

What is your stance on the longest operational deployment by the British Army, attempting to prevent two communities of UK citizens from slaughtering each other?

 

[Foxholer]

What is your stance on the longest operational deployment by the British Army, attempting to prevent two communities of UK citizens from slaughtering each other?

Mine is that, apart from the (admittedly huge) principle of not letting 'terrorists' win, they shouldn't have bothered! The stepped aside elsewhere often enough!

 

[stevie_r]

Mine is that, apart from the (admittedly huge) principle of not letting 'terrorists' win, they shouldn't have bothered! The stepped aside elsewhere often enough!

An example?

 

[SocketRocket]

Dodger has asked a very good question.
There is a level of arrogance [or ignorance perhaps, both of which we are well used to] in some of the anti Scotland postings.
I think that those who fall into that category should at least be brave enough to give him an honest answer.

Doon, you are a victim of your own arrogance and blinded by prejudice.

Where are all these anti Scotland postings you mention? I have only seen posts that counter the 'Yes' vote and challenge its validity and practicability! I feel there is more of an anti English undertone going on by some.

Regarding Dodgers question: We dont need to defend anything as we are happy with the status quo. Its not for the BT to make a case for something we want, we already have that, its up to the iScotland types to make their case for change and we will consider and give opinions as we feel appropriate.

I hope that is an honest enough answer but in your case I doubt if any answer will be seen as worthy, unless it mirrors your opinion.