Based on news reports it might actually come to pass, an independent Scotland for the first time in 300 years.

Seems like an act of lunacy to me.

Curious what other folks think and why.

Birdwatcher

If the people of Scotland want independence, then yes of course.

Why would that be lunacy? Was our independence lunacy also?

No reason Scotland shouldn't be independent. Scotland was a nation back in the day. Wales probably isn't far behind and Northern Ireland will eventually become a part of Ireland. Eventually England will be England.

The American Empire is next.

In division lies weakness.

It might be that Great Britain's status as a military power is irrelevant in the world today anyway, but for starters they'd have to negotiate to keep their nuclear subs in Scotland anymore.

Also, Scots and English have been settling all over each other's areas for decades at least, tons of Scots in England, lots of English up north. To impede or set boundaries on that seems ludicrous.

The appeal of an independent Scotland is emotional to be sure, but Scottish Nationalists over here should realize the Scottish government leans further Left than even the Brits.

Birdwatcher

You're right. We would have been better off staying with the Brits.

We obviously became weaker by winning our independence.

No way England and Scotland could work together as two independent nations. God knows it's never happened before.

Really? Do you hear yourself? A people desire to govern themselves, as we did and so many died for, and you think it's lunacy. Unbelievable

Scotland is a lot poorer than the rest of the UK and sucks up a huge amount of welfare money. If they become independent then their purse strings will get cut. It would be in their economic interest to stay in the UK, they need England more than England needs them.

Nationalism is a powerful thing though and God knows they've got enough reasons to hate the English given how England's treated them over the last 1000 years or so.

Yes I think Scotland should go independent, along with Texas, Alaska, Wyoming, Montana, AZ, Idaho and a whole slew of others

centralized govt's doesn't seem to have much benefit to the average citizen in this day and age.


sure it leaves the Ruskies and the Chinese as the superpowers, but I believe enough alliances could be formed to stymie any Manifest Destiny they might entertain.


freedom is a good thing, Birdwatcher sleeps on the floor and teaches school, I sleep on the bed and phart around alot.


I like the idea of smaller countries, heck it might even take root in Russia and China

I don't think a lot of folks here really give a chit what the Scots do, Brits either for that matter.
We had to fight for independence, I guess it's a kinder, gentler time these days.

The balkanization of countries around the world continues. With the UN, even tiny little chit holes have 'political power', and they can always agitate and demonstrate for wealth sharing.

I care because my lineage starts there.

As Crow Hunter said they will suffer financially and will have to go off the pound. I doubt they will adopt the Euro.

I think nationalism is clouding their view of reality. I wish them luck as they will certainly need it.

I work with an azzload of Scot's being from the old school of offshore projects and they all deeply feel yes.

I kinda have to take Crocodile Dundee's position on that. "None of my business".

I read somewhere that Scotland gets 90% of the North Sea rigs if they bail. That might help their situation. Not sure.

Impossible to prove but I'm guessing ...

Higher taxes, fewer jobs in the first five years. After that, I dunno.

It's not about if it's economically better or worse.

It's about a chance for these people to finally govern themselves.

Even if they fail. Even if they are socialists. It's not about anything other than them getting a chance at self government.

As Americans, I'd think we'd support that ideal.

This.

And, this.

A linked-question: Will England be better off, culturally and financially, without Scotland?

Treated whom one wonders? Gotta be careful with that "historic injustice" stuff.

Everyone right away thinks Highlanders who were a minority of the population, for the most part endlessly warring and massacring among themselves. Heck, even at Culloden in '45 there were more Highlanders present fighting on the English side than for the Jacobites. And if yer talking Lowland Scots, where precisely does/did Lowland Scot leave off and "English" begin?

Birdwatcher

When did that happen before?

And as an aside, as an example of what an independent Scotland might aspire to, let us look back on the enormous contributions made by an independent Ireland towards the cause of advancing democracy and decency and opposing evil around the world......

um.........

You must be Celtic, I am too, hence I quickly recognize such hysterical "logic".

I submit that if the American colonies had only the resources and land mass of Scotland as opposed to an entire larger depopulated continent to develop then the US would be just a quiet and insignificant backwater today, entirely dominated on the world stage by greater powers.



Didn't say they didn't have the right to split, just said it'd be an act of lunacy if they did.

Birdwatcher

Should Scotland go independent?


WWWWD?











(what would William Wallace do?

then based on what you say, you support La Raza taking over California in the near future?

Its impossible to say..Tax wise and in very simplistic terms, England, and to a lesser extent Wales, currently "support" Scottish taxpapers to a degree..

But if Scotland do go Independent, there will be huge financial costs to both countries.

Ironically, if the Scottish Nationalist get their version of an "Independent" Scotland, they will still be beholden to the British Treasury as they wish to �piggy back� off Stirling so they will end up with even less say than about taxation ect than now..Defence will be another similar situation.
Unfortunately, the boom years of North Sea oil/gas are long gone and I suspect Scotland will end up with a very Socialist Government which will be forced to raise taxes in the short term, but will eventually go bust..

I think that would weaken our one true strong ally.

If the Scots are sick and tired of British Socialism and the nanny State, if they are alarmed at the what the results of unfettered immigration from the former Empire has done to London and Britain in general, if they want to do things "their way", then who could blame them for breaking free?

All empires break up sooner or later. Empires expand until finally they implode.

I believe the Scots by and large want more socialism and nanny-statism, if my brief googling this morning is anything to go by, and PeteE seems to confirm it.

In fact, some are theorizing (hoping) British conservatives in Parliament will get a boost when (and if) Scottish members depart.

Politically, Scotland already tends to lean several degrees further left than England/Wales, and has a far more extensive Welfare State than the rest of the UK..

Any future Independent Scotland is likely to be even more socialist in nature at least in the short to medium term..

I should aadd that the Scottish Nationalist also tend to be anti field sports and anti firearms and positively hate the traditional big Scotish sporting Estates..

Couldn't Scotland become independent and also be a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations like Canada and Australia?

Possibly..at present, should there be a "yes" vote, the issue of whether an Independent Scotland would retain the Monarchy or become Republic has not been discussed and would probably be the subject of another referendum at a later date.

In the past the Scots and Brits have had a few 'face slapping' incidents about Scotland independence. I believe the movie Braveheart fictionalized just one of many.

Unfortunately, a lot peoples "knowledge" of the history concerned is what they've gleaned from "Brave Heart"..

In many of the historic battles, there was often Scots fighting Scots, as many sided with the English crown..

Given the idiocy and ignorance of some posters here, I will refrain from commenting,other than to say I agree with BW, Hatari and Pete E. (say Pete, still continuing to enjoy the Anderson books! ).. j

I believe the Brit Naval base at Faslane is the largest employer in Scotland. The Scots seem to want all nuke weapons out of Scotland, and would most likely close the base. This will put a lot more Scots on the dole.
Scotland does not seem to be able to support itself, and certainly won't be able to after their socialist state expands.

Note that I did say 'fictionalized.' That movie had more than 1 historical error.

For those who don't know, Faslane is where our Trident subs are based and it represents a huge stumbling block on any future Independence negotiations which will need major concessions from one or both parties..

So, a bunch of nanny-state socialists want to break off from the UK and indulge their socialist fantasies??

Maybe these folks can have a nice chat with California and our Northeastern states and convince them to secede from the US?????

Seriously, if the South/Southwest wanted to secede from the US, we hear there would be a huge war (again). If New Jersey/California/New York wanted to secede from the US, do you think any Southerners would want to die to try to keep them in??? As long as New York didn't try to keep everyone's 401k money, I highly doubt it.

Sometimes, divorce can be a GOOD thing. Is there really "strength in numbers" when those "numbers" don't get along.

Don't count on it, Northern Ireland-ers are STERNLY British; they will become independent before they join Ireland.

I would think I would want those issues worked out before I decide on a yes or a no; but that's me. I like to see that there is a plan before I move.

The South should have been allowed to secede; Lincoln was wrong.

If the Scots want to be independent, then they should be allowed to be independent. I don't care if they're socialist, communist, or freakin devil worshipers; people have a basic human right to self determination. They want to run their nation into the ground and become 3rd world, that's their right.

If I understand you correctly and I probably don't the commonwealth nations keep the Queen or king as head of state while having a prime minster as head of government?

If they want

They were their own country for a long time

Snake

As I understand it the lowland Scots sided in with the English as well as some highland Scots as most of the lowland Scots were not Gaels. Highland Scotland was a hybrid between Gaels and Picts with the Picts being assimilated into the Scot Gaels. I also understand that the Vikings settled into Northeastern Scotland and eventually assimilated into the Scot Gael/Pict population.

From what I could gleam from the Scottish news papers that about sums it up. They seem to think they can have a utopia socialist state while not going bankrupt like England has done.

Figuring that out is beyond my pay grade.

Maybe if the Anglo Irish out produce the Catholic Irish Gaels in population. The Catholic Irish Gaels certainly would rather be Irish than English.

That's correct..Another the option, albeit an unlikely one, is that an independent Scotland could crown a new monarch..I seem to recall reading about an somebody claiming to be a descendant of Scottish royalty..

We agree on that. However, I bet a free Scotland would quickly learn what William Bradford learned capitalism works better than socialism.

You also have all the infighting between the various Scottish clans and the fact some were bought off at different times by the English Monarchy..

Usually at any one point in history you have people on both sides working to several different agendas/loyalties, which often changed as the circumstances changed..

I have done a good amount of hunting in Scotland & the off shore islands. Great hunting there for Red Stag, Sika Stag, Fallow Deer, sheep, birds, rabbits & waterfowl. The people in the country are great & dislike the liberals in the big cities & in England. My hunting buddy married a Scottish lass that was managing one of the estates we hunted. A poor country & after leaving the few major highway's you travel on single lane cart roads built in many cases by the Romans. Not an expert on Scottish economy, but hopefully the best decision will be made.

Sadly, the Nationalists will stop most of the stalking and shooting and will try their very best to destroy all the old Estates, and all down to socialist class envy..

Yup, that sure seems the case from what I could gleam from the Scottish newspapers. A social utopia while not going bankrupt in the process. Seems the nationalists are upset with England for going bankrupt while not providing enough socialism and they think they can do it better.

I glad to see not all the crazy people are in the US.

I'd just like to see some REAL diversity, not the PC bullcrap that masquerades as diversity. By real diversity I mean such things as a country made up entirely of Scots.

If independent, will they still make whisky, wear kilts, play bagpipes, and hold the highland games?

Nothing wrong with that. I sure wish Washington DC would go bust.

Good question, I don't know.

That's probably what will happen to Scotland if they go the socialist utopia route. Washington DC is bust they just don't know it yet.

My heart says, 'AYE!', but my head says, "OCH JAYZUS, NOO YE'VE DUN IT!"

I would love for Scotland to gain her independence, but I fear that doing so may not be all it's cracked up to be. Godspeed to the nation of Scotland and her people, including my many family members there.

My sentiments exactly.

Stumbled onto this, even Krugman is saying Scotland will have a rough go of it. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/08/opinion/paul-krugman-scots-what-the-heck.html?_r=0

Pete, help me out. If these things are so, that

1.) The Socialists want Independence
2.) If they go that route and if Britain pulls all of its military and the associated jobs
3.) The future gov't taxes the wealth right out of existence thus breaking up the estates and putting those workers out of job (some families have generations maintaining the estates as they have told me)


I can see no future but higher business taxes, thus driving off all UK based companies and more jobs. The number of people on the dole will swell, and Scotland will quickly become a Celtic Zimbabwe.

Am I reading that correctly?

Didn't read the article because I just ate lunch. But I'd be willing to bet that secretly Krugman doesn't like it because breaking up goes against his ultimate goal on one world government.

you think that way because you are not Scot. That is an assumption on my part, but it will do. The friggin british have been trying to hang my family since william wallace.

Sounds like a big mistake, but it's their country, let them vote to go how they want and reap the consequences, good or bad.

That is the overwhelming fear, although I suspect the real situation is far more complex. At present both sides are scare mongering and trying to swing the vote in their own respective favour, so there is not much informed/reasoned debate going on..

The British Chancellor has said if they gain independence they will also inherit part of the National Debt, which as caused a mixed response from the Nationalists.

If they refuse to accept that, its likely the UK (and possibly others) would then veto them joining the European Union, which would be another screw in their coffin..

The English were trying to hang them harder than their own Scottish enemies were?

Irish Catholic here (7 of 8 great-grandparents) and only 1st generation American on my mom's side..

Sorry, ain't saying this is necessarily true in your case but when you actually look beyond the appealing, romanticized generalities the truth is generally far more complex, and banal.

Sorta like the situation with American Indians in our own history.

OTOH as a group us Celts do seem to have a proclivity for a sense of aggrieved historical narcissism, which combined with a propensity for an unsophisticated and immediate sort of violence, might explain why it generally ain't too difficult to get yer mass kicked in predominantly Celtic areas. Heck, getting and/or giving in that regard being viewed as a sort of recreational pastime in those places

Birdwatcher

Don't be so thin skinned. The Scots will fight the English..the English will fight the Scots or the Welsh. If the English are not around, the Welsh from North will fight those from South Wales, while the Highland Scots will happily try to knock holes out of their Lowland cousins.

If we are not fighting over nationality, we will probably be fighting over religion, politics, women, beer or just football.

See? In more'n a few places where alchohol is served to the general public, that alone would set it off right there...

Ay, laddie, and that's not the half of it. For example.



Remember Dunoon!

I don't profess to understand all the finer points of debate over this issue, it just seems to me that folks from the UK Isles,( of which I also have roots) have been growing, fighting ,and separating for centuries.

They have a genetic predisposition of holding grudges for generations, fighting folks that look a lot like them, and if you go back far enough, are actually related....all the while the muslim horde is pushing north and stealing their country from them.
Foolishness...gaining independence at this stage is like shifting deck chairs around on the Titanic, the most important battle is being lost with the immigration of the muslims to the UK.

It's like two dudes in the last white subdivision in Memphis fighting over who does a better job on their lawn. While the whole rest of the craphole is being run by brain dead, primitive ,parasitic, hoodlums.

It's quite hard for me to watch actually.

Bowfisher pretty much hit the nail on the head.....

My view of Scotland is blurred by my memories of it.

I remember Campbeltown and Macrahanish as a friendly place full of gracious people. Most of those that I met though, were Brit military...

I recall meeting one of the most beautiful women that I've ever laid eyes on. I was 22 years old at the time and immediately began fantasizing about this gorgeous Scottish lass, only to find that she, and her husband, were from Brighton, England.

Maybe we're forgetting that short term failure can be a long term success.

They want to be socialists, fine. Hopefully it fails and in the long term they may learn to love freedom again.

In any case, win lose or draw, they deserve to govern themselves

I've been reading and studying ancient Celtic history, philosophy, religion, culture, and society. The Celts tend toward anarchy, individualism, and they hate authority. The Celts have always wanted a centralized state but have never been able to pull it off because of the above traits.

If Scotland goes for independence it will be interesting to see what happens. After thousands of years Ireland finally pulled it off so who knows.

Of course they should. It's one way to escape England nutty anti-gun laws.

Oh believe me they'll keep the nutty gun laws and probably add a few we've never heard of before.

One question I wonder about is over the years how many people have moved from one area to another or married people from another area. When these changes comes about sometimes there are people with conflicting interest or family's that are divided.

I am a Scottish Celt.
Hell yes we ought to be independent from England. Those bastards sold out after they were conquered by the Romans, 2,000 years ago.

The Romans never took us over, and Hadrian had to build a wall to keep us out.

Is it too early in the thread to start posting pics of hot redheads who might be Scottish?

Never to early for a wee ginger lass

Correct..For example the present Scottish Parliament is busy enacting a ban on air weapons....

Funny how the North did not feel that way back in the mid 1800'S. miles

A primer on Scottish Independence for the non-British

well, at least that is a biased British based view. I am sure the SNP has a different take on things.
Sounds a lot like listening to Fox news first, and then switching over to MSNBC. Same facts, totally different take.

They obviously never heard of the Battle of Culloden of 1745 and how close the highlanders and Bonny Price Charlie came to overthrowing King George II or the diaspora and oppression that followed the defeat. But I digress.

Apparently, the best and brightest of the Scots were deported and killed after the battle for the Scots to become such socialists. After all, much of American freedom can be traced to Scottish philosophers.

The Scots will fight the English..the English will fight the Scots or the Welsh. If the English are not around, the Welsh from North will fight those from South Wales, while the Highland Scots will happily try to knock holes out of their Lowland cousins.
OTOH as a group us Celts do seem to have a proclivity for a sense of aggrieved historical narcissism, which combined with a propensity for an unsophisticated and immediate sort of violence, might explain why it generally ain't too difficult to get yer mass kicked in predominantly Celtic areas. Heck, getting and/or giving in that regard being viewed as a sort of recreational pastime in those places

what is one to do? There is that side of the family, the other side is kind of attila the Hun. Which explains my screwed up personality.
As to the hanging comment, it goes back to the time of william wallace, and my family having to relocate to germany, then not getting along there, relocating to the america's. And the british again getting pizzed about something called sedition. The interesting thing always to me, is my dad knew nothing about geneology and research. But he told me as a child of the highland scottish connection, which had to have been passed down in oral history.

The following comment posted kind of really hit home. I usually will accept a lot, until I don't, and it really describes it: "They have a genetic predisposition of holding grudges for generations, fighting folks that look a lot like them, and if you go back far enough, are actually related..."

I have had an issue with authority, being told what to do..not.. holding grudges once they start, and so on all my life. I didn't really know why it was so until i started doing the research, then it became clear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Wedderburn

Why lunacy? The more decentralized governance is, the better for personal liberty.

+1

Yet more ignorance. HUGE difference between "de-centralized" government and complete independence. It would sheer luncacy for the Scots to seek independence, particularly with no means of sustaining themselves. It would be just as stupid if states all of a sudden decided to leave the US. Oh wait, SOME of you think it's a good idea so my original post stands...

Same here.

Get rid of the muzzies?

More personal liberty in a socialist country that is even now, according to Pete, trying to ban air rifles?

You have not been following the conversation at all.

They actually didn't come very close at all. They showed up at the battlefield & Cumberland essentially massacred them. Prince Charlie ran away & escaped Scotland dressed as a woman.

That story about a man escaping dressed as a woman repeats itself so often in history. It was said Abe Lincoln had to travel to Washington DC, after his victory, dressed like a woman.

Actually, according British historians, the Highlanders were just outside the gates of London. The Highlanders turned around and went back North because a spy whom the Highlanders thought was one of them convinced them that the King had 9,000 regulars waiting for them. It was a lie but it worked. The French allies were already to cross the channel to assist the Highlanders but once the Highlanders turned around and headed back North the French stayed home. The British finally caught up with the remainder of the Highlanders at Culloden where the Highlanders made some serious mistakes and the Duke of Cumberland, the second son of King George II, made no mistakes.

The BBC has a nice video on this on you tube. There are other British documentaries on the Battle of Culloden as well. And there are books of clan histories covering this rebellion.

BTW: Until the Battle of Culloden the Highlanders had won every battle all the way down to London.

After the culloden defeat Charlie escaped to the Hebrides where a woman named Flora McDonald dressed him up as her maid and helped him rendezvous with a French ship to make his escape. It's all historical fact and easy to look up, it was detailed at the interpretive center at the Culloden battlefield when I toured it a few years back.

Only idiots and progressive fascist pay any attention to what Krugman the Liar says.

Didn't say it wasn't true. Just that history repeats itself on that point a lot. I think a famous Christian martyr escaped the Romans that way, too. Next time the Romans came after him, he was too ashamed to try it again, thus his martyrdom.

It is for Scotland. They're a bunch of drunken welfare suck-ups who need England to write the checks.

BTW, I'm of Scottish ancestry. hick...hick...belch...pizz pants...

[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zMWVpS0CnrA[/video]

Where's Mel Gibson when you need him.....

[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=IN61UrW5qUo[/video]

Battles had not been fought on English soil for 100 years prior to the uprising of '45. The Jacobite army did indeed win two (IIRC) battles on their way south when the hastily assembled British forces broke and ran in the face of charging highlanders.

What did NOT happen was the anticipated massive upwelling of popular support from the English population (recall that even in the Highlands, perhaps an actual majority of Highlanders belonged to clans at odds with those in the Jacobite ranks).

The Highland Army may have well marched virtually unopposed into London, but not likely would this entirely alien bunch of non English-speaking tribesmen have been able to hold it for any length of time.

When in due time the English government DID respond with a trained and disciplined army that would stand and fire coordinated volleys in the face of a highland charge the highlanders were overwhelmingly defeated: Pretty much why no modern armies of that era relied on edged weapons as their primary infantry offensive tool, the highlanders brung broadswords and axes to a gunfight.

Even had the attempted surprise attack on the British camp the night before Culloden succeeding in routing the British (as it likely would have), the highlanders were doomed anyway.

Not to mention the presence of those clans who came down on the British side.

Birdwatcher

If the Highlanders had marched into London and if the French had sailed and proved support things would have been very different. But none of the "ifs" happened and we all know how things worked out.

You are right though the Highlanders did bring a knife to a gun fight.

Hard to overstate how alien and savage the kilted highlanders appeared to the regular English of that time. The highlanders were the product of a feudal system quite apart from mainstream Western civilization in a tribal society that had remained essentially intact in most particulars since before Roman times.

How well the 600,000 plus Londoners of 1745 would have tolerated about 5,000 savage highlanders in their midst is open to question. I'm not sure there were ever 600,000 highlanders at any time in their history.

After Culloden of course the highlanders were persecuted about like wolves, to once and for all end their forays from the remote highlands and open up those places for more profitable endeavors.

The romance with and fictionalization of all things Scottish came much later.

Worth noting in the context of this debate that Scottish Highlanders and their descendants living in the American colonies almost to a man came down on the British side during our own revolutionary war.

Birdwatcher

Yup, Culloden broke the back of the feudal clan system for good. Those Highlanders not killed, shipped to the American colonies, formed the shock troops for the British government.

When the Highlanders fought in the Afghan campaigns the Gurkhas were assigned to the Highland regiments. Because the Gurkhas fought wild like the Highlanders and had a charge very similar to the Highland charge the Gurkhas were inducted as honorary members of the Highland regiments. Hence, the reason at the military tattoos at Edinburgh castle one will see Gurkha pipes and drums.

I have a book on the history of the military Scottish regiments with plenty of B&W pictures of the time period with Scottish military regiments and Gurkha regiments together.

So you're okay living under tyranny because division causes weakness?

I'd rather be weak than be subjugated to a tyrannical govt. Fahq Britain.

Of course the Scots should be independent of the Limey bastids if that's what they wish.

The Irish booted their dumbasses out of their country and don't seem to be regretting it. The Guinness and Jameson's still flows out of the country.

In this case if I were Scottish, given the sort of government independence would bring, home rule would seem by far the greater tyranny.

Better turn in them dangerous air rifles, disband those unfair elitist estates, end the barbaric practice of blood sports, and probably get around to banning pointy kitchen knives in Glasgow while expanding the welfare state even further.

If independence DOES pass its gonna be by a close vote, meaning nearly half the residents of Scotland will feel about like I would, but outvoted by those most desirous of wealth redistribution and free stuff, about like the way Obama got reelected.

I'm curious now as to what proportion of the Scottish population is rural vs. big city.



Tyrannical government? ENGLAND? Hard to think of a single instance since 1914, and that was 100 years ago.

Note they are not standing in the way of Scotland leaving, probably financing the balloting in fact. Pretty much the exact same way the whole Empire disintegrated; countries ironically being allowed to vote themselves out according to the just rule of applied British legal principles.

The only place most English would likely just as soon see let go, Northern Ireland, ain't ever going to leave on account of the Ulster Prods would face political oblivion in a Catholic majority united Ireland. Therefore England will be compelled to continue to spend blood and treasure propping up the place indefinitely.



What? The IRA won a military victory? Against England?

Pretty much exactly like the American Revolution there was always tremendous sympathy among a large proportion of the English public re: the innate justice of the Irish cause. Even more so in the case of Ireland because all they HAD was terrorism, never being remotely strong enough militarily to defeat the British in open battle.

The same moral forces that disintegrated the rest of the Empire also allowed Ireland independence.

As to the nature of the IRA at that time and since, I'll be charitable and state that difficult times call for difficult measures, but try being a Catholic dissenter in the Bogside of the 70's (watch out for your kneecaps; drills and all that ) and what ever DID happen to Michael Collins anyway?

The way the English have set it up, I dunno that there's any downside to being an Irish citizen living in England, I'm pretty sure that you still get free medical care and all the other perks regular Brits get, and maybe even indefinite residency/working privileges I dunno.

Meanwhile the Republic of Ireland continues to enjoy the same de-facto protection of the British military, same way it has since independence despite opting out of fighting against the unprecedented rise of Nazi tyranny 60 years ago (tho' more than a few of her sons and grandsons joined Allied units in that struggle, my own father and his brothers for example).

If not for British sacrifices and resolve, Ireland, like the rest of a politically fractured and disjoint British Isles likely would have been, would have been chafing against GERMAN rule at some point.

...but yes, as you point out, tho' the rest of the Irish economy might be in the tank just now, Guinness still flows like water out of Dublin, and fortunately, Irish citizens can still freely seek employment in England and elsewhere

Birdwatcher

So far the winner for the most ignorant post on this thread. "Tyrannical gov't?, really? The Irish booted their "dumbasses" out of Ireland? Really?

I had a Scot in my office yesterday and we were talking about this. Apparently one if the driving forces behind this is the unchecked immigration in the UK from Muslim countries and Eastern Europe. For obvious reasons you won't see that talked up in the press.

The Scots have this funny idea of Scotland for Scots and they don't want to become a minority in their own country to the Muzzies. They see the way the train is going g in the UK and they want to get off at the next stop before it is too late.

You'll see similar movements here for the same reasons soon enough.

The Scottish National Party says that one of its main policy's is to increase the work force. They have outlined three proposals one of which is to *increase* immigration!

And it will be Scots making those decisions, not some English asshats in Whitehall.

So you ok with California allowing more Mexicans in intead of some asshats in DC?

Nothing wrong with increasing immigration as long as the immigrants can assimilate into Scotland's Gaelic culture which generally means white. No Muslim on earth can assimilate into any white culture especially Gaelic culture.

I go to a fair number of feiseanna, most competitors are white of Gaelic culture, usually of the Irish persuasion, a few are black and Asians but I've yet to see a single Muslim at any of these.

Muslims are the dark side of the Force.

I don't give a flying frick. Should California ask to secede, I'm sure anyone with half a brain would jump all over that.

But then again, I'm not a statist Johnny Come Lately.

If California was it's own sovereign republic absolutely.

Point I am making is that many people hold a position on the issue but don't know actually know what the various political parties are proposing..I was fairly shocked my self when I read that particular policy, but as they say the devil is in the detail.
And as for �asshats in London making the decisions � a) there is already a Scottish Parliament with a wide degree of powers and b) Scottish MPs sit in the British Parliament to represent the views of their constituents so we are a world away from �No taxation with out representation� as was the case a few hundred years ago�

From what you are describing it does not sound like it's in the average Scot's best interest to separate. It sounds more and more like the National Party is not heading in the right direction.

Ann Coulter has asked why we can't just give California back to Mexico?

As we learned and as was the case about 150 years ago, if you are in the minority and those asshats are not, your "representation" is not worth a damn.

Well, that never stopped the average American from explaining to a British gentleman why the Scottish people are doing something.

So you and the other guy with half a brain are perfectly ok with the dissolution of the United States? And Johnny COme Lately? to this thread? or at least that what I take it you meant .......

Latest poll has swung back in the "No" direction. Looking back at the data scatter over all the polls I don't see it passing.

Sure I'm okay with it. What kind of twisted frick would want to keep people around if they didn't want to be around?

No, I mean to this country.

Would you miss it?

The US is going to dissolve anyway no matter what you, I or anyone else thinks. All empires die eventually.

Except for the vineyards, I can't say there's much that I would miss.

They would have to take on all the debt, though. And they would have to keep Janet Napolitano.

What's with the propagation of the myth that Irish and Scots are white? Pale of skin, but negroid by all other measure.

Not unless they want the UK military crawling up their rear ends and to have London oppress them even for a few hundred years.

Not that anyone in the US would have any insight into this...

Sounds to me he is saying that he'd have no problem if a "net taker" from the system were to opt out. It's all a matter of opinion on one hand, and purely theoretical anyway. This discussion (along with anything having to do with the original meaning of the US Constitution) was settled over 160 yrs ago.

FOAD would be appropriate here, but how old are you and how many years of military service (to this country of course) and or combat tours do you have? Personally, I've been here 54 years, 30 of them (plus four months and seventeen days) as a member of the armed forces. If you like, I can send you a copy of my DD-214 (which includes rank, combat and decorations) ... But with a handle like "Joe Bob" it's probably all in vain, but I can also send you some coupons to Bed Bath & Beyond, they'e having a sale on white sheets....On second thought, FOAD is best...

If they don't want to "be around" then they can emigrate.

Thanks.

Who told YOU?

SHARE your insight.

Specifics please.....

GFY Joe Bob.

Bumpity

Unless you're a Cuban who made a nice living sponging off the US taxpayer, no need to get upset. Of course, statists always instinctually come down against freedom. They just don't understand and it and fear it.

Good lord. Do people not read what they're writing? Huge +1.

WTF

Wrong bait? Too big of a hook?

Naah, prob'ly too many people agree with you.

For my own part, I find myself really worried that this dissolution might take place, and will be profoundly depressed if it does.

The strength of my feelings on this is a surprise, after all I ain't lived there for nearly 45 years and always knew I was an American citizen even when I WAS there (tho I knew no actual Americans other than my dad).

Maybe the roots of one's raising really do run deep as the song goes, if Scotland opts out it'll feel like disaster.

Other's MMV,
Birdwatcher

Scotland has a government it's just a question whether they will have a constitutional president, monarch, or become a member of the commonwealth.

I think scotland has to do what scotland has to do, good or bad proven over the long term.
I keep coming back to that word i think i saw on this thread, strawn, meaning not liking being told what to do. Character flaw or character attribute.
I really don't dislike the british per se, but there is a part of me that flares up every time i think of them being the lord and master. And i never had to live under their system. Kind of the way i feel about this system.
I know the atvantages of the federal system, but still think states should have had the ability to opt out.
And i dang sure have never liked living under the new nobility which in this country are the politicians in washington.

Hmm, so who would be monarch??

Aye, there's the rub.

But I'd guess in about EVERY historical war with the Brits, about half the Scots involved found it in their best interest to side with the "English" side, which was also their side.

And despite our historical illusions, traditional Celtic societies were among the most UN-free around. And if ya think of snobby Brits, and "arses in Westminster" etc... Some of the most pernicious snobbery and class pretentions I have encountered was among the Irish Catholics, against other Irish Catholics, fully as bad as anything Brit, (and that's saying a lot).

IMHO we in the United States owe a huge cultural debt to the Scots-Irish, the anti-Celts, whose mindset, I believe, gave us our own egalitarian mindset as well as strong tradition of armed freedom. Heck, even William Wallace, living where he did, was closer to one of them than anything Highlander, popular American illusions notwithstanding.

So now we have this referendum on Scottish Independence. When ya get past all the illusions and emotional appeal, the people pushing this turn out to be arch socialists and social progressives. Sorta ironic, I'm pretty sure "Braveheart" would be roundly condemned by this bunch: Utterly homophobic don't ya know, and promoting male domination and violence as well as the carrying of weapons.

As for "the british" being "lord and master", kinda hard to view them that way when they have been pouring wealth to prop up the people living in Scotland for generations now and when, most importantly, Scotland already has the freedom to vote themselves out of the United Kingdom any time they want. How much LESS dominating could the "English" be?

If Scotland DOES go independent, those Scots who think like most folks on this board are truly f***ed. And you can bet the farm that they WONT be given the freedom of voting themselves out of a socialist progressive (and impoverished) Scotland.

JMHO,
Birdwatcher

Drove a hunting buddy & his wife to the airport flying to Scotland last night. Wife is from Scotland & she & all her relatives support independence. She contends that the vote will be close, but that the dislike for the Brits will win the day for independence. She contends that Scotland will do just fine without financial support from the Brits. I'm told even if there is a vote for independence there is a 2 year window to resolve issues. Probably, will continue to have some sort of joint military & other trade agreements with the Brits.

My Grandson's other Grandpa was [he died a few years ago] Sir Niel McCormick. He and his father before him were main players in the effort for Scottish independence.

If Scotland goes independent it will have to reapply for membership in the EU and NATO.

The EU is unlikely to allow membership if it doesn't accept the Euro as it's currency and Spain might blackball membership to send a message to the Catalonia Independence movement.

http://mashable.com/2014/09/15/scotland-yes-eu-nato/

There's also the question of all that North Sea oil that Scotland Independence front folks think will save their economy. I seriously doubt the remaining part of the UK is going to give that up with out a fight.

Hell even the Royal bank of Scotland (along with other financial institutions) is going to pull up stakes and leave if the Scot vote yes.

Going to be an ugly divorce if it comes to pass.

From the polling data, it looks like it is NOT going to pass.

Thought I would bring this back up to see if the resident Grand Dragon's going to answer my simple questions...

[bleep] the brits! Separation!

Phil

No, history shows most socialists don't learn that because it's as much a religion as a political-economic system.

No they won't. They will do a dance, make a deal with the new government, and stay put.

[/quote]

Thought I would bring this back up to see if the resident Grand Dragon's going to answer my simple questions... [/quote]

44, and 6 with no combat as that my time fell between Bush 1 and Bush 2.

Combat? For you? S-3 Viking driver? Lots of battles with Russian subs in these wars we had no?

It's it still self determination if they self determine to remain with the UK?

I guess so. I don't see why not.

My Mother's side of the family largely were from Scotland. I really don't care one way or the other. Just as long as they don't materially raise the market price of their most famous product.

They won't

All the Scots with any balls already immigrated over here a long time ago...

The hottest lassies did too...:)

We're coming close to a de facto arrangement on that. Maybe Oregon, Idaho and Montana could then maintain border security.

The Scots would survive. A people who invented golf, fly fishing and whisky have greatness in their heritage.

And Haggis? Scottish food was invented on a dare.

That's why whisky and er...scot lassies were invented!

So, the mere fact that they're having this vote is self determination and the results of it really don't matter?

Hooray for self determination!

Too bad Lincoln didn't think of putting it to a vote. Might have saved about 600,000 lives.

And some kernel of American liberty, at least in the CSA.

Well now, what would Mel Gibson say?

Looks like the saner heads prevailed in Scotland.

"Bleep, bleep, bleep, bleep-bleep, bleepity-bleep, bleep, bleep..."



...anyways, I'll join with millions over there... HUGE sigh of relief....

YES!!!

yeah, but ya know England is going to have to be kissing Scotland's azzz a lot more now...

while I love Scotland, and having lived over there for 3 years in my youth...I can't imagine the UK, without Scotland...

and if Scotland would have gotten its independence.. ya know Northern Ireland would have followed suit, and that would have caused a major reflair up of the Catholics and Protestants in Ireland...for reunification...

I love Haggis

All the separatists needed was 6% of the vote to separate.

It ain't over until it's over and it ain't over yet. This vote will come up again. According to the radio a lot of the young people voted for separation.

Empires always break up sooner or later. Great Britain will break up into the several countries that make up Great Britain.

Not necessarily so for a number of reasons. The Quebec question has come to a vote twice, and that movement has calmed down quite a bit since the last. As for the young, there are a few universal thrusts about them.

1. the love change
2. they age a get over it