Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[05omegav6]

As found here...

A Common Sense Guide to the Scottish referendum.

Put in a separate thread as I felt it warranted it, and whilst it might not be free of political opinion, I found it a very informative read.

Basically I was curious as to the actual question of the referendum.

This is, "Should Scotland become independent? "

Note the use of the word "SHOULD"... a Yes result only means that the majority of those voting feel that it should become independent. This has no immediate bearing on anything, as all the rubbish bouncing around the media as a whole is speculative.

Having answered Yes, the realities of becoming independent may well be too much to overcome, rendering independence a futile exercise. There is NO timetable for becoming independent if the result is Yes.

Of personal interest, the Island groups have three options if the vote is a Yes one:

1. Remain in Scotland.
2. Remain in the UK.
3. Become independent in their own right.

It will be interesting indeed to see, if the occasion arises, whether Orkney and Shetland elect options 2 or 3, and if so what effect that might have on oil revenues. Incidentally, the Leader of Orkney Islands Council is pushing for devolution from Holyrood regardless of the outcome of the vote next week.

A truly independent Scotland may prove to be little more than an Utopian dream yet...

[chrisgixer]

Thanks Al I shall browse later to give full attention. Assuming the article has no self gratifying agenda of course.

[05omegav6]

Have skimmed through those parts of interest to me, and from what I can see it's refreshingly free of nonsense.

Those who think they have something to say seem to be sticking to traditional media...

[Varche]

Good post thanks.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

As found here...

A Common Sense Guide to the Scottish referendum.

Put in a separate thread as I felt it warranted it, and whilst it might not be free of political opinion, I found it a very informative read.

Basically I was curious as to the actual question of the referendum.

This is, "Should Scotland become independent? "

Note the use of the word "SHOULD"... a Yes result only means that the majority of those voting feel that it should become independent. This has no immediate bearing on anything, as all the rubbish bouncing around the media as a whole is speculative.

Having answered Yes, the realities of becoming independent may well be too much to overcome, rendering independence a futile exercise. There is NO timetable for becoming independent if the result is Yes.

Of personal interest, the Island groups have three options if the vote is a Yes one:

1. Remain in Scotland.
2. Remain in the UK.
3. Become independent in their own right.

It will be interesting indeed to see, if the occasion arises, whether Orkney and Shetland elect options 2 or 3, and if so what effect that might have on oil revenues. Incidentally, the Leader of Orkney Islands Council is pushing for devolution from Holyrood regardless of the outcome of the vote next week.

A truly independent Scotland may prove to be little more than an Utopian dream yet...

Will almost certainly prove.....

[Rog]

So . . . . . . as of today

We have ISIS who have executed a UK National added to others, and without doubt are pretty effin serious about what they want and their vision of how the World should be

We have Russia playing brinksmanship over Ukraine etc

We have mega richness Vs mega poverty across the World

Starvation and over consumption across the World

We have climate change

We have nuclear armed states like N Korea and Pakistan with questionable political motives

Genocide in various African regions

Blah blah blah etc etc etc . . a whole load of serious stuff

 . . . . and then we have Salmond et al wanting to make their name as a latter day William Wallace   

Bonkers . . . . . absolutely bonkers

[05omegav6]

So . . . . . . as of today

We have ISIS who have executed a UK National added to others, and without doubt are pretty effin serious about what they want and their vision of how the World should be

We have Russia playing brinksmanship over Ukraine etc

We have mega richness Vs mega poverty across the World

Starvation and over consumption across the World

We have climate change

We have nuclear armed states like N Korea and Pakistan with questionable political motives

Genocide in various African regions

Blah blah blah etc etc etc . . a whole load of serious stuff

 . . . . and then we have Salmond et al wanting to make their name as a latter day William Wallace   

Bonkers . . . . . absolutely bonkers

You could argue that actually these are all the same age old discussion...

One group of people wanting something that someone else either already has or that they don't want or agree with.

The only notable difference being that civilised society doesn't generally kill people to make a point.

There are two ways of dealing with the likes of IS, or whatever it's called this week.../North Korea/etc*

One is to wipe them off the face of the earth, the other is to ignore them. There might be some middle ground somewhere, but that's the crux of it.

It can be a shitty old world sometimes


*delete as applicable.