Scottish independence

[SocketRocket]

I was 15 years old when we went through the Cuban crisis so you are totally wrong there.
Do you remember Greenham Common, and the warm welcome the people of Newbury gave to the Cruise missiles?

Greenham Common was invaded by 'The Womens Peace Camp' a motly band of yogart knitting pacificts, hardly the 'people of Newbury'. Regarding the Cuban Missile crisis it was only the threat of a 'Nuclear War' that stopped the Russians from building up bases in Cuba.

Coming back to your previous comments: So you dont think Scotland would lose jobs or income if it lost the Subs? I still think you are jumping onto the SNP bandwagon here.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Greenham Common was invaded by 'The Womens Peace Camp' a motly band of yogart knitting pacificts, hardly the 'people of Newbury'. Regarding the Cuban Missile crisis it was only the threat of a 'Nuclear War' that stopped the Russians from building up bases in Cuba.

Coming back to your previous comments: So you dont think Scotland would lose jobs or income if it lost the Subs? I still think you are jumping onto the SNP bandwagon here.

Wrong there SR, many local residents were involved in the campaign. The peace camp was only a fairly small weekday part of the protest. It was much busier at weekends when the working public and students were involved
Noisy lesbian protesters made good copy for the newspapers, middle class couples and students did not not.

I am aware that a few British naval jobs will go at Faslane but that is the price of democracy.
There is strong support for Scotland to be a nuclear free country.

 

[Wildrover]

Wrong there SR, many local residents were involved in the campaign. The peace camp was only a fairly small weekday part of the protest. It was much busier at weekends when the working public and students were involved
Noisy lesbian protesters made good copy for the newspapers, middle class couples and students did not not.

I am aware that a few British naval jobs will go at Faslane but that is the price of democracy.
There is strong support for Scotland to be a nuclear free country.

Many local residents were involved in the campaign, but how many were not. In situations like that you always see/hear the vocal minority, but never hear from the vast majority of residents who are happy or apathetic about the situation. Or was at least 51% of the population of Newbury out there every weekend. Oh, by the way, Students don't count as locals in my book as most will only be there for a very short time before moving away.

 

[stevie_r]

I moved to Greenham Common in early 93; there were 4 or 5 of the protesters left in residence despite the Cruise Missiles being long gone. I seem to recall their leader went by the superb name of 'cat spider crone'. They lived by blue gate which was where the postie delivered their giros.

Eventually they got bored and moved to Aldermaston.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Wrong there SR, many local residents were involved in the campaign. The peace camp was only a fairly small weekday part of the protest. It was much busier at weekends when the working public and students were involved
Noisy lesbian protesters made good copy for the newspapers, middle class couples and students did not not.

I am aware that a few British naval jobs will go at Faslane but that is the price of democracy.
There is strong support for Scotland to be a nuclear free country.

Nuclear free ?!:lol:

Does that include getting power from Nuclear stations

Does it also include no longer having the North Sea patrolled by subs and ships.

Will never be "nuclear free"

 

[Adi2Dassler]

Wished the Trident workforce agreed with that. Plymouth would love it down their to increase employment.

Plymouth would get nowt from closing Faslane as a Nuclear base, nowt of they closed Coulport either.all the nukes would be sent back to America because no-where, and I mean no-where in England has the capacity/security abilities to house them like coulport does.

So are you allergic to Submarines or just plain pacifist, do you disagree that the nuclear umbrella has been the major contributor in stopping a World War over the last 65 years? Will you miss all the jobs and money flowing into the local economy? Or as I suspect are you jumping on the bandwagon of 'Nukes out of Scotland' only because it can be used as a kind of rallying battle cry!

The MAD scenario earned its acronym well.

'Main Scottish Naval Base'!!! And what will that be, a couple of frigates? Should balance the books.

The people of Plymouth already have ships with nuclear weapons and manage to keep it in perspective. Bet you never even gave the matter a second thought before Alex started making it an issue for independence.

What ships in Plymouth have nukes?I genuinely have never heard anyone say this.They occasionally have subs there for overhauls iirc, but prior to that they're de-nuked in Scotland.And the incremental,affordable increase in a new Scottish navy would not only replace the jobs removed by removing nukes, but also help The Clyde by letting BAE build our ships in out yards ( beside your ships in out yards_

Nuclear free ?!:lol:

Does that include getting power from Nuclear stations

Does it also include no longer having the North Sea patrolled by subs and ships.

Will never be "nuclear free"

Eventually we could be nuclear stationless, we have the capacity of renewables, the tech just needs improving.

And yes, in Scottish waters, subs would not be allowed to patrol.Whether that in enforceable is another thing, but building a few rigs out to the west to drill out our other field might stop them...generally, subs hitting rigs or trawlers works out pretty bad.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Do you think that there will be a "Scottish Navy , Army and Air Force " - not in a million years - can say that with 100% that will never ever happen.

And renewable energy will never sustain the whole country because the cost to produce renewable energy is far too big and they can't foresee it reducing.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

Do you think that there will be a "Scottish Navy , Army and Air Force " - not in a million years - can say that with 100% that will never ever happen.

And renewable energy will never sustain the whole country because the cost to produce renewable energy is far too big and they can't foresee it reducing.

That's the spirit!

 

[Adi2Dassler]

Do you think that there will be a "Scottish Navy , Army and Air Force " - not in a million years - can say that with 100% that will never ever happen.

OK, so Scotland votes Yes next year and we decide to have no military?I'm pretty sure that's an avante garde approach to Nation building, and one I'm theoretically behind, but I forsee issues from the outset.Initially, lets just have a military and then move the wee fat jambo onto world peace,eh?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

OK, so Scotland votes Yes next year and we decide to have no military?I'm pretty sure that's an avante garde approach to Nation building, and one I'm theoretically behind, but I forsee issues from the outset.Initially, lets just have a military and then move the wee fat jambo onto world peace,eh?

How can you afford the build a military forms scratch - do you think the Scottish people in the current uk military will just switch across ?

They won't have a separate military - it's not affordable or workable.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

How can you afford the build a military forms scratch - do you think the Scottish people in the current uk military will just switch across ?

They won't have a separate military - it's not affordable or workable.

We wouldn't build one from scratch, we'd have approx 9% of the current UK one, give or take a few bits and pieces.And some serving folk wouldn't want to to join a new Scottish force, but some would, but we could employ some others...hey, we'd reduce unemployment at the same time.

Lets not be silly about things, we'd have a military.Every with a gram of common sense knows that.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

We wouldn't build one from scratch, we'd have approx 9% of the current UK one, give or take a few bits and pieces.And some serving folk wouldn't want to to join a new Scottish force, but some would, but we could employ some others...hey, we'd reduce unemployment at the same time.

Lets not be silly about things, we'd have a military.Every with a gram of common sense knows that.

Why would you have 9% of he current one ? They are the UK military which you are leaving and will just leave the Scottish bases and move to the English ones leaving you to form your own. That's just personnel - let's not forget the equipment which goes with it - billions upon billions worth of equipment - just one Typhoon is over 30 mil to buy let alone look after.

Currently the people employed in the current uk force are contracted to the UK force on long engagements.

There will still just be a UK military and Scotland would just pay for their services.

I spent 22 years in the military working alongside a number of jocks and the last place the majority wanted to be based at was Scotland.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Here's a model for Scotland from a friendly country pop 4.5m (you could choose Norway - but just for a change...)

http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/about-us/default.htm

Is their mission and objectives that different from those of an independent Scotland? Besides - as the UK would never have to 'stand alone' in any significant conflict - similarly Scotland would never have to. Joint Forces and all that - all the easier and simpler to create (interoperability and all that) given one would be fashioned out of the other.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Here's a model for Scotland from a friendly country pop 4.5m (you could choose Norway - but just for a change...)

http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/about-us/default.htm

Is their mission and objectives that different from those of an independent Scotland? Besides - as the UK would never have to 'stand alone' in any significant conflict - similarly Scotland would never have to. Joint Forces and all that - all the easier and simpler to create (interoperability and all that) given one would be fashioned out of the other.

Didn't the UK stand alone against Argentina and still currently do in The Falklands , also will the Scottish Military be in Cyprus or Germany or one of the many embassy's around the world that you currently see UK military working.

You can't compare Scotland to New Zealand etc because New Zealand weren't a country part of a wider force.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

Why would you have 9% of he current one ? They are the UK military which you are leaving and will just leave the Scottish bases and move to the English ones leaving you to form your own. That's just personnel - let's not forget the equipment which goes with it - billions upon billions worth of equipment - just one Typhoon is over 30 mil to buy let alone look after.

Currently the people employed in the current uk force are contracted to the UK force on long engagements.

There will still just be a UK military and Scotland would just pay for their services.

I spent 22 years in the military working alongside a number of jocks and the last place the majority wanted to be based at was Scotland.

Fortunately for any post yes Scotland, I'm pretty sure you'll not have a seat round the negotiation table, so I think those that do will be able to see the bigger picture.But answer me this-

If Scotland isn't allowed a proportion of the hardware/assets that the tax payers of Scotland have funded, would Scotland have to take on the same proportion of liabilities and debts accrued when we were in The UK?

no assets=no liabilities, yes or no?

 

[stevie_r]

We wouldn't build one from scratch, we'd have approx 9% of the current UK one, give or take a few bits and pieces.And some serving folk wouldn't want to to join a new Scottish force, but some would, but we could employ some others...hey, we'd reduce unemployment at the same time.

Lets not be silly about things, we'd have a military.Every with a gram of common sense knows that.

The Scottish Military would be absolutely shambolic for years to come. A number of those Scots currently serving in the British Army may well transfer across; I would suggest that a significant number wouldn't, particularly Senior NCOs and Warrant Officers who would see a much reduced career progression opportunity. The Army is nothing like a civvy firm, you can't go out and recruit a Sgt, SSgt etc etc. It takes a lot of time, effort and investment to develop people sufficiently for them to be effective. On that note, the Scottish Army would lack the training school system that the British Army currently has ie School of Signals, School of Logistics etc etc - I would envisage an agreement for the Scottish Government to pay the UK to train its personnel on certain key courses.

The Infantry and Royal Armoured Corps recruit on regional lines and therefore you could argue that this would form a healthy basis, however, the supporting arms and services do not recruit on regional lines. You would therefore be hoping that (using the Royal Signals as an example) sufficient Scots transferred across that could fill the various trade group roles (and ranks) of the Brigade Signal Squadron. Good luck with that.

The white paper suggested a Brigade sized formation (in reality a Brigade +) based on 3 infantry/ marine battalions. The white paper was a bit woolly on details:

2 Armoured Recce units - Really? for a Brigade? Or would that be two Squadrons.
2 Artillery units - What size? Two Regiments would be a bit OTT for a Brigade, so two Batteries?

If a Scottish Army had a deployable Brigade then in reality it wouldn't deploy more than a Battalion + at any one time on operations. It simply isn't possible to commit to deploying more on a long term operation. As a consequence it would not be a major player in any operation and would find itself under operational command of a foreign country. The consequences are that they would more than likely be guarding the bogs at the Port of Entry. 3 Battalions to provide cover on a long time deployment means you are away 6 months of every 18. Soldiers know this sort of stuff and it may well be a big stumbling block to British Soldiers willingness to transfer.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Fortunately for any post yes Scotland, I'm pretty sure you'll not have a seat round the negotiation table, so I think those that do will be able to see the bigger picture.But answer me this-

If Scotland isn't allowed a proportion of the hardware/assets that the tax payers of Scotland have funded, would Scotland have to take on the same proportion of liabilities and debts accrued when we were in The UK?

no assets=no liabilities, yes or no?

They had the use of the assets when they were part of the UK - leave the UK they leave the assets along with the debt etc. They want independence then off you trot and set up on your own using your own money. I wonder how many people in Scotland would be willing the Government to be able to spend billions building the three services.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

The Scottish Military would be absolutely shambolic for years to come. A number of those Scots currently serving in the British Army may well transfer across; I would suggest that a significant number wouldn't, particularly Senior NCOs and Warrant Officers who would see a much reduced career progression opportunity. The Army is nothing like a civvy firm, you can't go out and recruit a Sgt, SSgt etc etc. It takes a lot of time, effort and investment to develop people sufficiently for them to be effective. On that note, the Scottish Army would lack the training school system that the British Army currently has ie School of Signals, School of Logistics etc etc - I would envisage an agreement for the Scottish Government to pay the UK to train its personnel on certain key courses.

The Infantry and Royal Armoured Corps recruit on regional lines and therefore you could argue that this would form a healthy basis, however, the supporting arms and services do not recruit on regional lines. You would therefore be hoping that (using the Royal Signals as an example) sufficient Scots transferred across that could fill the various trade group roles (and ranks) of the Brigade Signal Squadron. Good luck with that.

The white paper suggested a Brigade sized formation (in reality a Brigade +) based on 3 infantry/ marine battalions. The white paper was a bit woolly on details:

2 Armoured Recce units - Really? for a Brigade? Or would that be two Squadrons.
2 Artillery units - What size? Two Regiments would be a bit OTT for a Brigade, so two Batteries?

If a Scottish Army had a deployable Brigade then in reality it wouldn't deploy more than a Battalion + at any one time on operations. It simply isn't possible to commit to deploying more on a long term operation. As a consequence it would not be a major player in any operation and would find itself under operational command of a foreign country. The consequences are that they would more than likely be guarding the bogs at the Port of Entry. 3 Battalions to provide cover on a long time deployment means you are away 6 months of every 18. Soldiers know this sort of stuff and it may well be a big stumbling block to British Soldiers willingness to transfer.

I have zero knowledge on all things soldiering, so I'll bow to your obvious superior inside track, and appreciate also the sensible reply.

Would a new Scottish military not also create opportunities for ambitious soldiers looking to make a career out of it?There is obviously limits in the current set up, and given the ongoing downsizing (I've witnessed myself in RAF High Wycombe) opportunities are becoming less and less.

I also realise that by its very nature, the military automatic response would be to vote No to a greater degree, but not all of them.

I think everyone accepts that initially things like Military might take a while to find its feat, but with less engagement in stuff like Iraq, less policing places like the falklands, its all workable.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

They had the use of the assets when they were part of the UK - leave the UK they leave the assets along with the debt etc. They want independence then off you trot and set up on your own using your own money. I wonder how many people in Scotland would be willing the Government to be able to spend billions building the three services.

So you suggest no assets and no liabilities? I might try and find you a seat at the table after all.We have our own money by the way, it called sterling.

congratulations on being ignorant, you wear it well.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

So you suggest no assets and no liabilities? I might try and find you a seat at the table after all.We have our own money by the way, it called sterling.

congratulations on being ignorant, you wear it well.

Let's not start getting personal shall we - I'm giving my view point on a unworkable or affordable Scottish military after seeing how the Military works for the last 22 years. Don't start dishing out the insults ok.

What we can do is revisits this in the years to come and you will find no change in the military right now. It's unworkable or affordable for a separate Scottish Military to work as a separate force. There will be a UK military which Scottish Battalions will be a part of.