That’s answered in Article 89:
Nice to see fear of the Red Menace is alive and well in the 21st century.
Explain further how Scotland wanting nuclear submarines moved out of its waters is a liability for the EU.
Why are you sure Mr Putin will offer a warm hand of friendship? What are you basing that on and in your opinion would that be a good or a bad thing and why?
There won’t ever be a referendum. Neither major party is going to risk asking the opinion of the people on a serious EU issue if they can get away with it (note there’s an parliamentary alternative).
This article is only intended for Turkey.
In the context of the question, “whither Scotland?”, the point is that there is one heckuva historical trend towards countries taking their leave of the British Empire when given the chance, and not much precedent for countries remaining in it. But maybe Scotland will be the exception.
To some extent you’re right. OTOH, the cultures that got the British boot to the face might beg to differ, and since the gunboats were so ubiquitous, those pretty much remain some people’s image of British culture.
Not a commentary on individual Britons, some of them seem nice enough.
Last week a poster on here supporting the union pointed out that bookmakers were seeing a massive number of bets for a NO vote. I pointed out that these were bets placed throughout the whole IK and possibly beyond. Today we have the figures for bets placed on Scotland.
Over 70% for Independence. Previous analysis has shown betting is often closer than polls. We shall see.
Could be people hedging against their shares falling in the inevitable post-Yes crash 
(seriously, not a bad way of doing it. ISTR you yourself saying something about buying vacation dollars before the pound falls.)
Because the EU nations depend on NATO for security and Scotland removing nuclear submarines removes two elements of that. One is the bases to counter naval threats in the North Atlantic from Russia and secondly it effectlvely disables the capability of one of the two European nuclear powers that maintain the balance of power with Russia and any other nuclear capable powers.
You might not have noticed but the nuclear threat has not gone away. There are plenty of nations very eager to have this capability so it is good idea to hang onto it.
I was being sarcastic about Putin. It plays into his hands to see NATO capability degraded by the myopic nationalism in Scotland.
Scots may not take seriously the threat from Russia, but there a lot of EU states that certainly do. ’ The last thing the Baltic states, Poland and countries bordering Ukraine want to see is a weakened NATO. They are very fearful of Russian intentions, with good reason.
You seem to think that the EU free trade club is an answer to all the worlds ills. It isn’t. It helps to promote stability between member organisations by exercising soft power but at its borders there are states that are unlikely ever to ‘get with the programme.’ It faces a major challenge to the East the the EU doesn’t have a lot of cards to play.
It will be winter soon and Mr Putins hand is on the gas tap that supplies Europe. If the EU had the forsight it would have had an integrated energy grid by now so it can shift electricity and gas around. It doesn’t. They never quite got it together and so a lot of EU countries could find themselves very cold or much poorer this winter.
The Scots are in a frenzy of narcissistic contemplation at the moment. When they wake up and look around they may find that the world is a dangerous place and it is prudent to have strong alliances. Independence will remove Scotlands UK security blanket and they will have the considerable expense of trying to create a military from scratch that they can ill afford.
Alliances like NATO are the EU are two way affairs. A certain level of commitment is required even from little countries like Scotland. They will have to do some sort of deal.
The rUK will have time to relocate its weapons- I suspect that it will be in exchange for retaining the pound- a decade rather than four years. Several other NATO members are nuclear weapon free. Ireland which has a similar geographic status seems to thrive outside NATO.
Scotland was never a colony of the British empire. It is part of Britain itself. The question of Scottish independence is quite different to that of a former British colonies such as Ghana.
[QUOTE=TriPolar]
In the context of the question, “whither Scotland?”, the point is that there is one heckuva historical trend towards countries taking their leave of the British Empire when given the chance, and not much precedent for countries remaining in it. But maybe Scotland will be the exception.
[/QUOTE]
That’s like saying the Philippines should have chosen to remain part of the United States because all the former US territories acceded to statehood. None of Britain’s imperial possessions had democratic representation; Scotland always has. It’s also worth noting that nearly all those former colonies chose to join the Commonwealth after independence.
Well, no. England Plus leases HMNB Clyde from Scotland and leaves its submarine force there. Or it moves them to Portsmouth or Devonport or builds a new base somewhere away from the Channel. Really, it’s not that big a deal, and it’s not as though the UK’s nuclear deterrent is that important nowadays.
@ Ximenean: Do they feel like a colony? I don’t understand everything about the Scots’ motives at all. All I can say is that they might not be part of Britain itself for much longer.
RNATB: How’d you quote me as TriPolar?
Whoops. I deleted the quote link info by mistake and tried to fill it back in by hand. It’s early and I haven’t had my coffee yet. Apologies to TriPolar.
No, I would not say we “feel like a colony”. The motives of most of us in favour of independence have little or nothing to do with throwing off imaginary shackles of imperialism.
The Philippines were never considered to be included as part of the United States’ Manifest Destiny. That would have been a nice territory to hang onto, but the US Army really screwed the pooch by massacring so many Filipino civilians, if they ever considered being part of the US in the first place.
Anyway, the British Empire’s Manifest Destiny seems to be towards further fragmentation. Maybe in another 100 years it will consist of a few dozen city-states loosely linked in a Commonwealth.
Not that big a deal? Have you seen the cost estimates?
An independent Scotland that cannot defend itself and cares little for NATO, is content to undemine the capability of the UK yet at the same time depends on both the UK and NATO to guarantee its security and that of the sea lanes it depends on for trade.
What sort of independence is that?
Who is going to take this freeloading nation with an over inflated ego seriously?
If the independence vote passes, there will very quickly be a reality check and all the voices that have hitherto been quiet as the Scots steadily dilberate the nuances of their identity will make their views known. That may come as a rude awakening after all those months of ego massage.
It is cold, bad world out there full of threats and dangers. Deals have to be done and small countries have often have very few cards to play.
You are missing my point. You see Russia as the principal threat to Scottish security precisely because the EU has been so successful at resolving the threats which were, historically, much greater.
But all this is something of a red herring. I agree with you that the EU and NATO will both be somewhat pissed if Scotland leaves the UK; they would prefer to have the UK remain as it is. But if Scotland does leave the UK, that option will not be on the table. For both the EU and NATO, the choice will be between iScotland outside the organisation, and iScotland withiin the organisation. And both would strongly prefer to have iScotland within.
They will pursue their own interests. Those interests are best served by having Scotland participate. The way in for Scotland will therefore be smoothed. The Scots know this. The idea that either the EU or NATO would cut of their own noses to spite their faces in a fit of pique is not one to be taken seriously.
I am sceptical that the UK nuclear capacity does anything much for anyone, beyond enhancing the UK’s sense of its own hairy-chestedness. But, be that as it may, I am extremely sceptical that whatever value the UK’s nuclear capacity has lies in its being based in Scotland. I can see that it will piss the UK off if they have to spend money moving it. I can see that that must in some way degrade the UK’s capability for something, since that is money they might otherwise hav spend on something remotely useful. But “the balance of power in Europe”? No, I’m not seeing that.
Are you suggesting that NATO will exclude Scotland, and then get shirty because Scotland is not a NATO member?
Frankly, if NATO is liable to behave as you thing, the Scots would be wise to accept that hand. But in the real world, I do not think they will have that dilemma.
Lol!
Tell anyone from Ireland that they have been thriving for the past six years.
It would be trite to point out your use of a no true Scotsman argument here. But I will anyway.
None of Britain’s overseas possessions were ever considered part of the United Kingdom, either. The point is that comparing Scotland with Burma is ridiculous.
The cost estimates for what? Rehoming the nuclear force?
In that case, you should probably be warning the Dutch, Luxemburgish, et al. on of their impending collective doom.
Pretty amazing speech by Gordon Brown in defence of the Union. Why wasn’t Brown more prominent in Better Together from the start? Since his intervention the number of Scottish Labour voters voting for independence has dropped from 35% to 25%!
There will clearly be some negotiation to be done between an independent Scotland, the UK, NATO and the EU.
Scotland will sign some kind of leasing deal for the nuke bases.
As it is, they cost more than the projected Scottish defence budget to run.
There is a lot of work to be done to decide what sort of armed forces Scotland can afford.
Even if it did get a proportion of the hardware proportunate to its populatation the UK armed forces are organised nationwide, there is no easy way to move bases around. Military hardware needs a big support infrastructure and there are no training facilities in Scotland.
Both the UK and Scotland need to look at this in detail. I suspect when the costs become clear sore me sort of special defence treaty will be negotiated which allows some kind of compromise.
Some people seem to imagine that nuclear warheads can be simply put in the back of a lorry and driven to England. There are some huge costs involved and Scotland has no skills to deal with this.
Defence is only one area that has to looked at, many parts of UK government are located in Scotland or England and Wales and they have to be split and moved.
Same is true of the private sector, all companies are going to have assess their exposure to Scotlands economic prospects.
All this is a huge amount of work and it will inevitably cost money. I am sure some divorces are very straightforward, easy and fair in the best of all possible worlds. But this is not the best of all worlds and I am not confident this is likely to be at all smooth.
These are huge problems and it being complacent and even flippant about it does not mean the problem will go away. That is to behave like some salesman who sells some wonderful product, confident they they will never be involved in the delivery when reality clearly falls short of the dream.
I think Salmond will disappear from the political scene after this and hand his poison chalice on to others. Cameron won’t be far behind.