Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

UK to Scotland: Walk away, lose the pound


questionmark
 Share

Recommended Posts

Speaking of 'dictators' English policy to tackle Scottish independence is fear based and punishing in the extreme if the Scots vote for a separation from the UK. So 'we love you Scotland and hope you'll remain in the Union BUT if you leave then you get nothing but grief from what's left of the UK'. Doesn't sound like much of a union to me...funny thing is that Cameron and the rest of the Unionist have shot themselves in the foot by playing tough...even if independence is voted down, there is already a significant YES to independent Scotland to form a legitimate mandate for greater autonomy and the fact that Scotland is being bullied and insulted by Cameron and Osborne will be a telling factor in the aftermath and a rallying cry for the nationalist movement in the future.

Either way the "union" will never be the same after this referendum and the issue will never really leave the Scottish agenda, it will just fester until the next referendum.

English policy? its not even Scottish policy for Independence, its the SNP, a political partys policy, it was the SNP who wanted a referendum to be held to see if they - politically can carry enough voters with them and get a YES vote to leave the UK. we'll have to wait till September 18th. to find out. But lets make no mistake about this. the referendum isnt England vs Scotland. even though SNP leader Alex Salmond would love the issue to be fought exactly along them lines, with a backdrop of Scotland V's the English. Salmond planned all along - on fighting this referendum on that policy, and its backfired. remember Alex Salmond goading Prime Minister David Cameron to have a Live televised debate.

Prime Minister David Cameron as politically outfoxed Salmond, Cameron as stayed out of the debate for two years after he, yes the Prime Minister granted The SNP permission to hold a referendum. he called Alex Salmond and the SNP's bluff, and the SNP have had two years to get their act together, to set a clear plan for achieving their political goal. we've seen in recent days that plan has fallen apart.

the SNP is in damage limitation mode, carrying on even though the wheels are coming off. they have no choice. i seen last night on the news Salmond saying with determination, an independent Scotland will continue to use the pound. Even continuing to say they will remain EU members after Independence because they are currently members. truth is they joined the EU as part of the United Kingdom not as Scotland alone. the EU have already stated it would be difficult, near impossible for them to join. they can apply but need all 28 members to agree. easier said than done.

The SNP, are putting their case forward, Why is anyone surprised when others point out the pitfalls in their plans. and hold them to account - the whole issue of this referendum is the SNP versus The United Kingdom of England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland. Its Not Scotland versus England, Wales & Northern Ireland.

Its my firm belief the majority of voters will vote NO against the SNP's independence campaign.

Edited by stevewinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is explaining what Alex Salom doesn't seem to know, i.e. the realities of currency union and whether or not he'd be able to join the EU, tyrannical bullying? It may not be what he wants to hear but it's just explaining to him what he doesn't seem to understand. If anyone's insulting Scotland it's himself and his party by misleading them like this. Is mr. Barroso of the EU bullying him and insulting the people of Scotland as well?

What exactly doesn't Salmond know? I cant see anything in Salmond's plan for a independent Scotland that is ill thought or in need of a plan B...the English establishment has just chosen to scuttle it by hitting below the belt with their demeaning and vindictive counter arguments and threats in refusing to share any of the goodwill and assets that an independent Scotland should be entitled to (pound sterling, overseas embassies, defence, territories etc etc). To be honest, if all the figures point to a worst off Scotland if it leaves the union (as the English suggest) you'd think that the English would be glad to see the back of Scotland, apparently not. and as far as Scotland's wish to join the EU even though Barosso has hinted at multiple veto's, it should be taken with a grain of salt since Scotland is already part of the EU and would more than likely make a better partner than a English fearful of German and French domination... the majority of the English want outta the EU anyway so do you think that the EU is blind to this. So if Cameron cares so little about the EU to risk it all in a referendum why should the rest of the EU do Westminster's bidding? When the time comes EVERYONE will be singing from the same page of Salmond's sonata.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

English policy? its not even Scottish policy for Independence, its the SNP, a political partys policy, it was the SNP who wanted a referendum to be held to see if they - politically can carry enough voters with them and get a YES vote to leave the UK. we'll have to wait till September 18th. to find out. But lets make no mistake about this. the referendum isnt England vs Scotland. even though SNP leader Alex Salmond would love the issue to be fought exactly along them lines, with a backdrop of Scotland V's the English. Salmond planned all along - on fighting this referendum on that policy, and its backfired. remember Alex Salmond goading Prime Minister David Cameron to have a Live televised debate.

Prime Minister David Cameron as politically outfoxed Salmond, Cameron as stayed out of the debate for two years after he, yes the Prime Minister granted The SNP permission to hold a referendum. he called Alex Salmond and the SNP's bluff, and the SNP have had two years to get their act together, to set a clear plan for achieving their political goal. we've seen in recent days that plan has fallen apart.

the SNP is in damage limitation mode, carrying on even though the wheels are coming off. they have no choice. i seen last night on the news Salmond saying with determination, an independent Scotland will continue to use the pound. Even continuing to say they will remain EU members after Independence because they are currently members. truth is they joined the EU as part of the United Kingdom not as Scotland alone. the EU have already stated it would be difficult, near impossible for them to join. they can apply but need all 28 members to agree. easier said than done.

The SNP, are putting their case forward, Why is anyone surprised when others point out the pitfalls in their plans. and hold them to account - the whole issue of this referendum is the SNP versus The United Kingdom of England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland. Its Not Scotland versus England, Wales & Northern Ireland.

Its my firm belief the majority of voters will vote NO against the SNP's independence campaign.

Which ever way you look at it the Scots have a huge sense of nationalist...whether it's on the football pitch or their customs and history. They identify themselves as different to the rest of the UK and the English in particular. The SNP represents those Scot's that that wanna live independently while the rest want the status quo to continue. but none have challenged the Scottish identity or has the opposition asked to revoke elements of limited autonomy that Scotland enjoys. So you are right it isn't Scotland Vs. England...it's just about Scotland.

I can't see anything that Cameron could have done to stop a democratic process from taking place in Scotland...well nothing short of sending the army in that is. and like I've said earlier the wheels haven't fallen of the Scottish independence buggy...it's been sabotaged by the vindictive manner in which Cameron and Osborne have threaten the independence movement, something that will no doubt haunt and stay with the Scots and English for a long time.

Make no mistake, any pitfalls and plans that are hindering the SNP's drive for independence have been of Westminster's making. All Cameron is doing is trying to delay the inevitable.

Edited by Harry_Dresden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole thing is a farce really. What ever Scotland do they are going to end up much worse off than they currently are. Also leaving the UK and then joining the EU is basically just swapping one "master" for another, stricter master?

As an English person Scotland leaving won't effect me at all, so ultimately, I don't really care. But it just baffles me as to why they would given the alternatives.

Edited by Finity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which ever way you look at it the Scots have a huge sense of nationalist...whether it's on the football pitch or their customs and history. They identify themselves as different to the rest of the UK and the English in particular. The SNP represents those Scot's that that wanna live independently while the rest want the status quo to continue. but none have challenged the Scottish identity or has the opposition asked to revoke elements of limited autonomy that Scotland enjoys. So you are right it isn't Scotland Vs. England...it's just about Scotland.

I can't see anything that Cameron could have done to stop a democratic process from taking place in Scotland...well nothing short of sending the army in that is. and like I've said earlier the wheels haven't fallen of the Scottish independence buggy...it's been sabotaged by the vindictive manner in which Cameron and Osborne have threaten the independence movement, something that will no doubt haunt and stay with the Scots and English for a long time.

Make no mistake, any pitfalls and plans that are hindering the SNP's drive for independence have been of Westminster's making. All Cameron is doing is trying to delay the inevitable.

So Westminster has, through its machiavellian deviousness for which it is renowned, devised these pitfalls of the President of the EU saying Scotland wouldn't be able to just join the Eu as an independent country the day after it's won its Freedom, then? I never knew they had so much influence. And the business of not being able to rely on the bank of England supporting it; that, too, is all part of Cameron's devilish cunning? We've got a nice conspiracy theory brewing here. You really do seem to have been swallowed whole by Salmon's propaganda campaign.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is really bothering me..If/When Scotland leaves the U.K...is whose profile are they gonna use on their Postage Stamps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is really bothering me..If/When Scotland leaves the U.K...is whose profile are they gonna use on their Postage Stamps.

Couldn't they just leave the UK and keep the queen like all the other countries?

Edit: If not: William Wallace.

Edited by FLOMBIE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't they just leave the UK and keep the queen like all the other countries?

Edit: If not: William Wallace.

Sorry it cant be poor old Bill Wallace as they cant find his head, (last seen stuck on a pike at Tower Bridge London).
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry it cant be poor old Bill Wallace as they cant find his head, (last seen stuck on a pike at Tower Bridge London).

Then Mary Stuart? Oh, no, you have her head as well. You people! :no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't they just leave the UK and keep the queen like all the other countries?

Edit: If not: William Wallace.

I think that seems to be what they're hoping, that they'll still be able to keep the Queen, rather like the pound and everything else. It does raise another question though; would they automatically be part of the Commonwealth? Who decides that? the Queen? Would she agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then Mary Stuart? Oh, no, you have her head as well. You people! :no:

The Scots wont put 2 losers on their stamps,maybe put James the 1st, king of Scotland and England,but he didnt last long either,so maybe a Haggis, heh.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that seems to be what they're hoping, that they'll still be able to keep the Queen, rather like the pound and everything else. It does raise another question though; would they automatically be part of the Commonwealth? Who decides that? the Queen? Would she agree?

If she didn't would an angry mob wielding burning torches and agricultural Implements storm and sack Balmoral ?

Edited by shaddow134
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If she didn't would an angry mob wielding burning torches and agricultural Implements storm and sack Balmoral ?

Doubt it, they would give her a free pipe and drum concert 24 hours a day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which ever way you look at it the Scots have a huge sense of nationalist...whether it's on the football pitch or their customs and history. They identify themselves as different to the rest of the UK and the English in particular. The SNP represents those Scot's that that wanna live independently while the rest want the status quo to continue. but none have challenged the Scottish identity or has the opposition asked to revoke elements of limited autonomy that Scotland enjoys. So you are right it isn't Scotland Vs. England...it's just about Scotland.

I can't see anything that Cameron could have done to stop a democratic process from taking place in Scotland...well nothing short of sending the army in that is. and like I've said earlier the wheels haven't fallen of the Scottish independence buggy...it's been sabotaged by the vindictive manner in which Cameron and Osborne have threaten the independence movement, something that will no doubt haunt and stay with the Scots and English for a long time.

Make no mistake, any pitfalls and plans that are hindering the SNP's drive for independence have been of Westminster's making. All Cameron is doing is trying to delay the inevitable.

the SNP have not been sabotaged by anyone. truth is the SNP's plan for Scotish independence doesnt stand up to scrutiny. the two big issues at the moment are the SNP's assertion they can carry on using the pound £ in a currency Union, the second big issue is that of the EU and membership of that.

so seeing how the United Kingdom and all parties, including those of Wales and Northern Ireland, have stated a currency union with an independent Scotland is not in our national interest. somehow this transpires as all Cameron and Osborne's fault. they've threatened NO-ONE.

Covering old ground, EU membership, its been stated by the EU commission president Jose M. Barroso that Scotland would face difficulties, and be near impossible for an independent Scotland to join the EU. That statement has been backed today by none other than EU president, Herman Van Rompuy. they both understand the difficulties in getting 28 EU members to agree unanimously on a independent Scotland's application for membership. yet somehow the SNP failed to anticipate it. so tell me, is this also classed by the SNP and yourself as vindictive and sabotage by the EU, are both Barroso and Van Rompuy both hindering the SNP's drive for independence, delaying the inevitable? or are they just stating the facts to the proposals from the naive SNP.

Is it the default policy of the SNP and their supporters to call anyone who doesn't agree with them, liars, bluff, bluster and bullies?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that seems to be what they're hoping, that they'll still be able to keep the Queen, rather like the pound and everything else. It does raise another question though; would they automatically be part of the Commonwealth? Who decides that? the Queen? Would she agree?

Accession to the Commonwealth of Nations is assured (if requested). However, I get the feeling that Salmond wouldn't want that anyway, and, if this is the case, I strongly suspect that Balmoral Castle will be sold (I suspect Salmond has had his envious eyes on that piece of real - estate for a long time)

The only things that are absolutely set in stone is that

1. Scotland (as an independent nation) will not be in the Sterling area,

2. that EU membership will be a long way off, as much as 9 years (if they meet the entry criteria),

3. and as Scotland does not meet the criteria for Eurozone membership then Salmond had really get his act together to find a currency that will not default from the "get go".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accession to the Commonwealth of Nations is assured (if requested). However, I get the feeling that Salmond wouldn't want that anyway, and, if this is the case, I strongly suspect that Balmoral Castle will be sold (I suspect Salmond has had his envious eyes on that piece of real - estate for a long time)

A ready made seat for King Alex.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the SNP have not been sabotaged by anyone. truth is the SNP's plan for Scotish independence doesnt stand up to scrutiny. the two big issues at the moment are the SNP's assertion they can carry on using the pound £ in a currency Union, the second big issue is that of the EU and membership of that.

so seeing how the United Kingdom and all parties, including those of Wales and Northern Ireland, have stated a currency union with an independent Scotland is not in our national interest. somehow this transpires as all Cameron and Osborne's fault. they've threatened NO-ONE.

Covering old ground, EU membership, its been stated by the EU commission president Jose M. Barroso that Scotland would face difficulties, and be near impossible for an independent Scotland to join the EU. That statement has been backed today by none other than EU president, Herman Van Rompuy. they both understand the difficulties in getting 28 EU members to agree unanimously on a independent Scotland's application for membership. yet somehow the SNP failed to anticipate it. so tell me, is this also classed by the SNP and yourself as vindictive and sabotage by the EU, are both Barroso and Van Rompuy both hindering the SNP's drive for independence, delaying the inevitable? or are they just stating the facts to the proposals from the naive SNP.

Is it the default policy of the SNP and their supporters to call anyone who doesn't agree with them, liars, bluff, bluster and bullies?

Allow me to put this into perspective...for a clean Scottish break from the British Union, terms and conditions need to be agreed to by both parties before they debate and certainly before a referendum including currencies, defence, citizenship rights etc etc correct? So Cameron consents to a Scottish referendum, provides the funds yet feels the need to dictate the terms and enforce what ever conditions he feels will make the Scot's think twice in supporting the SNP through fear and a uncertain future without agreeing with the SNP months before the planed referendum, generally being un-co-operative. And not even consenting to a dialog or even a debate. In fact, Salmond can take his share of blame for not foreseeing such a obvious trap. So it's safe to say that Westminster, has been disingenuous about the whole process from the beginning. Now lets take this one step further...assuming that the YES vote prevails, Westminster, based on it's less than stellar honesty in the matter will delay and generally draw out the process with uncertainty until they achieve their desired result in administering hardship on Scotland and then offer it's teat as a treat, generally jerking the Scot's regardless of their so called "good" intentions and then push a upgraded Home Rule package that will tied them over for another 30 years. Utterly shameful that Westminster can preach political freedom and human rights abroad and then continue to play empire at home.

Admission into the EU is based more on principles and meeting standards than political pressure...you telling me that Bulgaria or Greece or Romania, on a per-capita basis have more to offer the EU than Scotland? Of course political pressure has it's own power-base as can be seen by certain member states blocking and harassing Turkey's EU bid. Of course the Turks haven't helped themselves with their disregard for EU norms and freedoms...but do you know what, Great Britain has been the BIGGEST supporter of Turkey (with all it's political and cultural faults, in fact it's not even part of EUROPE )joining the EU, YET refuses to provide not even a helpful commitment or dialog to their Northern Cousins the Scots...you'd think on this support alone that the English and Turks were long lost brothers and the Scot's were public enemy number one. So GB and the EU hierarchy bend of backwards for warping and distorting the facts of these Eastern Europeans, (allowing them to join the EURO even though they don't qualify, looking the other way on budgets and human rights and much much more) and the Turks but the poor Scots,( you remember those lovable tartan blue faced dudes) will be left out even though they're technically already in the EU cause their cousins don't support and despise Scottish independence.

...and YES...I do believe that liars, bluff, bluster and bullies are what the lads in Westminster are.

Cheers :)

Edited by Harry_Dresden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allow me to put this into perspective...for a clean Scottish break from the British Union, terms and conditions need to be agreed to by both parties before they debate and certainly before a referendum including currencies, defence, citizenship rights etc etc correct? So Cameron consents to a Scottish referendum, provides the funds yet feels the need to dictate the terms and enforce what ever conditions he feels will make the Scot's think twice in supporting the SNP through fear and a uncertain future without agreeing with the SNP months before the planed referendum, generally being un-co-operative. And not even consenting to a dialog or even a debate. In fact, Salmond can take his share of blame for not foreseeing such a obvious trap. So it's safe to say that Westminster, has been disingenuous about the whole process from the beginning. Now lets take this one step further...assuming that the YES vote prevails, Westminster, based on it's less than stellar honesty in the matter will delay and generally draw out the process with uncertainty until they achieve their desired result in administering hardship on Scotland and then offer it's teat as a treat, generally jerking the Scot's regardless of their so called "good" intentions and then push a upgraded Home Rule package that will tied them over for another 30 years. Utterly shameful that Westminster can preach political freedom and human rights abroad and then continue to play empire at home.

Admission into the EU is based more on principles and meeting standards than political pressure...you telling me that Bulgaria or Greece or Romania, on a per-capita basis have more to offer the EU than Scotland? Of course political pressure has it's own power-base as can be seen by certain member states blocking and harassing Turkey's EU bid. Of course the Turks haven't helped themselves with their disregard for EU norms and freedoms...but do you know what, Great Britain has been the BIGGEST supporter of Turkey (with all it's political and cultural faults, in fact it's not even part of EUROPE )joining the EU, YET refuses to provide not even a helpful commitment or dialog to their Northern Cousins the Scots...you'd think on this support alone that the English and Turks were long lost brothers and the Scot's were public enemy number one. So GB and the EU hierarchy bend of backwards for warping and distorting the facts of these Eastern Europeans, (allowing them to join the EURO even though they don't qualify, looking the other way on budgets and human rights and much much more) and the Turks but the poor Scots,( you remember those lovable tartan blue faced dudes) will be left out even though they're technically already in the EU cause their cousins don't support and despise Scottish independence.

...and YES...I do believe that liars, bluff, bluster and bullies are what the lads in Westminster are.

Cheers :)

but the President of the European Commission, old Manuel Barroso, has said that he doesn't think that Scotland will be able to just step straight into the EU. Do you simply refuse to listen to what he says or deny it as preposterous? It isn't the bullying blustering lying tyrant Cameron that's said that, it's the President of the european commission himself. But it's the lying blustering bully Cameron's fault for not lending vocal enough support to the plucky Northern cousins? Well, he wouldn't, would he. That's like expecting Abe Lincoln to say a word in support of the Confederate states' bid to be independent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but the President of the European Commission, old Manuel Barroso, has said that he doesn't think that Scotland will be able to just step straight into the EU. Do you simply refuse to listen to what he says or deny it as preposterous? It isn't the bullying blustering lying tyrant Cameron that's said that, it's the President of the european commission himself. But it's the lying blustering bully Cameron's fault for not lending vocal enough support to the plucky Northern cousins? Well, he wouldn't, would he. That's like expecting Abe Lincoln to say a word in support of the Confederate states' bid to be independent.

Abe Lincoln and the confederate war? are you suggesting that civil war is an option in the case of Scottish independence (the Scot's aren't abusing their slaves or with-holding taxes are they?) or are you saying that Cameron, Osborne and the rest of the Westminster crowd are righteous dudes for not terming the referendum in Scotland out right sedition worthy of military action like the American Civil War? Maybe you should have used the American civil war as an example since it has far more in common with the subject matter, just saying. So without a British objection do you really think that Manuel Barroso would still be talking about hypothetical veto's concerning Scotland's aspirations, i don't think so. It's far too early for the EU to make an opinion especially since nothing has been negotiated let alone won at the ballot box and Barosso's two cents is exactly that. In fact I'd go so far as to say that Baroso's "opinion" is ill timed and suspect and meant more to keep Great Britain happy for the upcoming referendum, assuming that the outta Europe crowd wins and Britain leaves (maybe England by then) do you think that Baroso will keep the same opinion about those hypothetical's?

The EU had no problem dismembering Yugoslavia and then admitting two of it's members (Croatia and Slovenia) into the fold...what makes Scotland so deserving of a veto?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think that Dave "Tyrant" Cameron has that much influence with the European Commission?

... and it was the EU that was responsible for the Yugoslavian civil wars? This really is rich conspiracy theory fodder here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think that Dave "Tyrant" Cameron has that much influence with the European Commission?

... and it was the EU that was responsible for the Yugoslavian civil wars? This really is rich conspiracy theory fodder here.

Heaven's No...Great Britain and it's political leaders, especially PM Cameron, joined the EU as a social club so they can unwind with fellow like minded peer's and friends and talk about were they intend to holiday, seeking no political advantage/advantages other than the odd photo opportunity and foreign trip abroad...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heaven's No...Great Britain and it's political leaders, especially PM Cameron, joined the EU as a social club so they can unwind with fellow like minded peer's and friends and talk about were they intend to holiday, seeking no political advantage/advantages other than the odd photo opportunity and foreign trip abroad...

Err, the present P.M. did not join the E.U. this was done long before he got into power, I guess you really dont know much about British politics having read your posts, and are arguing either to upset people or just for the hell of it,and what you've just said above is a load of bollix.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err, the present P.M. did not join the E.U. this was done long before he got into power, I guess you really dont know much about British politics having read your posts, and are arguing either to upset people or just for the hell of it,and what you've just said above is a load of bollix.

...golly gosh...how can I get it so wrong...I feel so embarrassed...lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, actually i can believe that, I expect that's probably what Mr. Alex does want to be part of the EU for, so he can rub shoulders or Hob Nob with powerful leaders and can pretend that he's one himself.

:innocent:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.