Print

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

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Owlbread]

I'm still looking ahead to 2020 or so. If the UK fails to deliver the promised powers and the Eurosceptics end up winning a UK-wide EU referendum, Scotland will probably end up having another independence referendum. We'll definitely have one in 10 years or so, I'm sure of that.

[Sheb]

Isn't that a bit optimistic? Cameron talked of the question being "settled for a generation". I hate to say this, but you cannot simply vote again and again until you have the result that suits you.

[Owlbread]

Isn't that a bit optimistic? Cameron talked of the question being "settled for a generation". I hate to say this, but you cannot simply vote again and again until you have the result that suits you.

Cameron can say whatever he likes. If the UK votes to leave the EU then we simply have no choice - there's no way Scotland will leave the EU, we'd leave the UK first through a referendum. 10 years is also a sufficient timescale for the next referendum as that will be, roughly, another generation. There's already a totally new generation of SNP leadership in power now that Alex Salmond has stepped down.

Notice I'm not calling for a referendum in 2017 or something, or one after that - that'll only happen if our hand is forced e.g. the UK shafts us over devolution and tries to pull us out of the EU. I don't want a referendum to happen any time soon because I know we wouldn't win (apart from in unusual circumstances). I'm happy for this to take as long as it needs, so that we can build a movement and support that will carry us over the line to victory next time. The fact that I know we will only have two referendums on independence at the very most, like the Quebecois, is exactly why I'm not asking for us to vote again and again until we get the result that suits us.

In any case - whenever the next referendum comes will depend entirely on the will of the Scottish people. It's not in David Cameron or Westminster's remit to rule that out for us. The Catalans are teaching us that right now.

The SNP also know that, for the time-being, another referendum is not on the cards. Circumstances will dictate that, they say. Over the next period of time we need to try to make Scotland as independent as we possibly can within the UK structure. Getting broadcasting devolved to Scotland along with the oil revenues is the next logical step. We need to campaign for control over everything besides defence and foreign affairs - a state I call "Home Rule". It pains me to write that, of course; defence and foreign affairs were the single most important reasons for me voting Yes but I know our day will come. In the meantime we must be pragmatic and make sure the UK don't waste our oil revenues on another 10 years in Iraq.

[Sergarr]

Don't worry, OB, no politician would be willing to properly go at the middle east again for a while. It'd be political suicide.

Cameron and Obama seem to think otherwise...

[Sheb]

Case in point: they don't want to do anything but bomb the place from 10,000 ft up because they're so afraid to send soldiers there.

[scriver]

The Scottish National Party now have 70,000 members. Considering they had 25,000 on Thursday, September the 18th that means they've nearly tripled their membership in 10 days. Scottish Labour in contrast have around 14,000 members in total at the most. The new members will basically turn the SNP into a massive grassroots movement rather than the streamlined campaigning machine they used to be; in my opinion that can only be a good thing as long as the seasoned campaigners remain in the driving seat.

Wow, people sure hated that Salmond guy didn't they?

[Graknorke]

If Cameron does try to get us out of the EU, I would be in full support of any attempt to Remove Cockney.

REMOVE JELLY EEL FROM THE PREMISES

[XXSockXX]

Wasn't there supposed to be a referendum about the UK staying in the EU soon-ish or has that been dropped? I don't remember...

[Sergarr]

Well, if they don't put their troops there, then they'll lose because Iraqi forces seems to be unable to push the ISIS away even with air support... they've recently lost another brigade.

[Helgoland]

The Kurds, man. I keep hoping for the Kurds.

[10ebbor10]

The Kurds, sadly, simply are not numerous enough to drive ISIS back. They can defend themselves, but they're not going to liberate Iraq.

[Sheb]

Well, the Iranians then.

[Sergarr]

But Iran is part of the "axis of evil", remember?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Iran is capable to negotiate compromises and follow deals.

Something that can't be said about ISIS, North Korea or Russian Federation

[Sheb]

Yeah, it's funny how American foreign policy seems to work out of sheer inertia sometimes. Iran would be a natural US partner in the region in many way, but it's like the US is afraid to back down on its policy of messing with it.

Or look at the ongoing embargo on Cuba, despite the fact that the Cold War has been over for 20 years now.

Of course, you could be cynical and think that the US is pursuing the Assad Strategy of battering moderate opposition to give the world a choice between murderous dictatorship and GLORIOUS AMERICAN FREEDOM.