Jump to content

The 2015 General Election Megathread


Rand Paul's Ray Bans

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 14.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • aussieh

    1284

  • JamboX2

    893

  • TheMaganator

    818

  • Boris

    639

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

HaymarketJambo

overjoyed to see that the basket isn't bigger in this case, it woulda been in an SNP world and it would be nowt to do with the labour party.

 

 

 

how much did the irish have to beg for ?

 

oil revenues ? it doesn't pay for the digging of the hole to get it out the ground and the SNP had the Scottish economy built on oil money and nothing else.

 

did the SNP say they were pulling out of NATO/UN, I'm sure they said they'd use NATO for defence but wouldn't supply any Land Bases or contribute any forces or any investment they just wanted NATO to defend us.

 

rather ironic that, just like the EU, as things stand that would indirectly be asking the English for help

 

If read my post I never said that the SNP would pull out of NATO, what I was talking about was the cost of Trident to Westminster i.e the Government of the day, I would want Scotland to be a part of NATO just other European countries our size, thankfully that is SNP policy to stay in NATO, that's why the SNP lost some of their MSP'S to the Green Party because they voted to join NATO if Scotland became Independent.   

 

How would we be asking the English for help, also aren't Northern Ireland and Wales apart of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as well as England. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOLZ.

To be fair to Trapper, excepting foreign policy, the SNP position is a,in to that of New Labour under Blair. It's New Labour in a yellow rosette.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to Trapper, excepting foreign policy, the SNP position is a,in to that of New Labour under Blair. It's New Labour in a yellow rosette.

To be fair to Al.

To compare the great SNP to any post Kinnock labour party is. LOLZ

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to Al.

To compare the great SNP to any post Kinnock labour party is. LOLZ

Not really when you consider policy and their economic and redistribution policies especially.

 

Tone and what they say is lefty, actions aren't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke

Did anyone see QT last night? :rofl: a right good balanced audience eh! The Dundee Tory branch bussed in from morningside to gloat and pull themselves into a frenzy over the GERS figures!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn

Did anyone see QT last night? :rofl: a right good balanced audience eh! The Dundee Tory branch bussed in from morningside to gloat and pull themselves into a frenzy over the GERS figures!

Maybe it was just a randomly picked audience that saw good reason to call Swinney and the SNP out for the frauds that they are.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke

Maybe it was just a randomly picked audience that saw good reason to call Swinney and the SNP out for the frauds that they are.

Aye righto[emoji1]

This was Dundee not Morningside or Helensburgh.

You suggesting the Tories aren't frauds? Or labour?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn

Aye righto[emoji1]

This was Dundee not Morningside or Helensburgh.

You suggesting the Tories aren't frauds? Or labour?

Of course they are but it's not like anyone pretends otherwise. That's the difference. Are you going to shout 'agenda' every time the QT audience doesn't feature face paint and claymores?

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke

Of course they are but it's not like anyone pretends otherwise. That's the difference. Are you going to shout 'agenda' every time the QT audience doesn't feature face paint and claymores?

Haha hardly but this was Dundee and not a voice for the SNP was fairly unrepresentative of the city wouldn't you say?

All this SNP battering and sometimes they deserve it btw I'm no SNP supporter but the irony from the parties that have conned and deceived us all for 300 years is taking the pish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, for a Red-Green Scotland. Not SNPTopia.

 

However, I'm happy with the devolution settlement now.

 

Go figure Boris! Haha

 

I'm not!  Any devolution settlement isn't enough, in that the mechanics of the Union need seeing to as well, e.g. PR for general elections, elected second chamberan English, or English regional, devolved parliament with the same powers as Holyrood, as should the Welsah and Nortehrn Irish.

 

Simply devolving more to Scotland doesn't fix the malaise at the heart of the union.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha hardly but this was Dundee and not a voice for the SNP was fairly unrepresentative of the city wouldn't you say?

All this SNP battering and sometimes they deserve it btw I'm no SNP supporter but the irony from the parties that have conned and deceived us all for 300 years is taking the pish.

Why stereotype? Dundee is near a vast area of central Scotland which for decades have been small c conservative rural farmer tories. What, because the audience weren't saying "twa" and praising Swinney means an agenda?

 

People may well view the GERRS figures badly and want to call Swinney, the man in charge of Scottish Government economic policy, up on that. And rightly so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not! Any devolution settlement isn't enough, in that the mechanics of the Union need seeing to as well, e.g. PR for general elections, elected second chamberan English, or English regional, devolved parliament with the same powers as Holyrood, as should the Welsah and Nortehrn Irish.

 

Simply devolving more to Scotland doesn't fix the malaise at the heart of the union.

Agreed. But not what I was talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. But not what I was talking about.

 

All I was meaning was that regardless of Smith Commissions etc, further devolution is pointless, or rather, will always fall short, unless the issues I mentioned are addressed.  IMHO, of course!

Link to post
Share on other sites
HaymarketJambo

Did anyone see QT last night? :rofl: a right good balanced audience eh! The Dundee Tory branch bussed in from morningside to gloat and pull themselves into a frenzy over the GERS figures!

 

I thought Swinney did well on Question Time considering that 5 of the panel was against him.

 

Jenny Marra of the Labour Party stole my heart though.  :2thumbsup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Swinney did well on Question Time considering that 5 of the panel was against him.

 

Jenny Marra of the Labour Party stole my heart though.  :2thumbsup:

 

Is that her just handed it back?

 

7cc3cac6682cdf39df42db6b442c79.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Swinney did well on Question Time considering that 5 of the panel was against him.

 

Jenny Marra of the Labour Party stole my heart though. :2thumbsup:

What did he say he had planned to address the budget deficit? Tax increases or cuts?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn

I thought Swinney did well on Question Time considering that 5 of the panel was against him.

 

Jenny Marra of the Labour Party stole my heart though. :2thumbsup:

I knew that some of the "low standards" JKB members would be all over her

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn

What did he say he had planned to address the budget deficit? Tax increases or cuts?

Danced around that question, surprisingly enough

Link to post
Share on other sites
manaliveits105

The electorate have been lied to by the SNP - if there had been a yes vote in the referendum we would be up shit creek now .I voted yes but wont be doing so again and wont be voting SNP in the coming elections . The behaviour of the cyber nats post referendum was also disgusting towards the elderly electorate . Jimmy Cranky oot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ibrahim Tall

The electorate have been lied to by the SNP - if there had been a yes vote in the referendum we would be up shit creek now .I voted yes but wont be doing so again and wont be voting SNP in the coming elections . The behaviour of the cyber nats post referendum was also disgusting towards the elderly electorate . Jimmy Cranky oot.

You voted yes solely based on the SNP? More fool you, you were voting for an independent Scotland not an SNP dictatorship.

Link to post
Share on other sites
manaliveits105

I was voting for an independent Scotland based on forecasts/figures produced by the snp of how well off we would be on our own - fool me once.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You voted yes solely based on the SNP? More fool you, you were voting for an independent Scotland not an SNP dictatorship.

Remember that one of their lies during the attempted con trick was that households were going to be ?500 a year better off. Every trick in the book was used to dupe punters in to voting Yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that one of their lies during the attempted con trick was that households were going to be ?500 a year better off. Every trick in the book was used to dupe punters in to voting Yes.

 

And equally so by "Project Fear".

 

That's politics!  Look at the blatant lies from the Tories post GE 2015!

 

If anyone was swayed by ?500 to vote yes, then more fool them, and the same goes for the other way too.

 

Not arguing against the White Paper and the SNP's case for independence being a castle built on sand though!

Link to post
Share on other sites

And equally so by "Project Fear".

 

That's politics!  Look at the blatant lies from the Tories post GE 2015!

 

If anyone was swayed by ?500 to vote yes, then more fool them, and the same goes for the other way too.

 

Not arguing against the White Paper and the SNP's case for independence being a castle built on sand though!

the big difference being, that the better together lies have cost us nothing, "same old shit as before" the SNP lies would see us with no money for infrastructure to run the country let alone make it profitable for us to be better off, it would have left us needing to ask somebody to bail us out.

 

not a great situation to drag a country of people into with a bunch of lies. how anybody can vote for a party that were willing to do that to millions of people is rather sad and its even more sad that the options are so abysmal.

 

viva politics

Link to post
Share on other sites

the big difference being, that the better together lies have cost us nothing, "same old shit as before" the SNP lies would see us with no money for infrastructure to run the country let alone make it profitable for us to be better off, it would have left us needing to ask somebody to bail us out.

 

not a great situation to drag a country of people into with a bunch of lies. how anybody can vote for a party that were willing to do that to millions of people is rather sad and its even more sad that the options are so abysmal.

 

viva politics

 

Hmm...not sure if BT lies have "cost us nothing".  Yes, it is the "same old shit", but changes to social security, underselling Royal Mail, potential Brexit...it's not like voting No kept the status quo as we see post GE2015.

 

Would we have needed a bail out if we had gained independence?  I don't know.  Nobody really knows.

 

Sure, I suspect that it would have been tough to begin with, but surely anyone looking at it logically would have understood that?

 

How can millions vote for a party that were willing to "lie" as you see it?  Perhaps your next point regarding the abysmal option is your answer?  Are the elctorate so disenfranchised from Westminster that they want independence, regardless of the cost?

 

That isn't the SNP's fault.  Deriliction of duty from the (not so) big three.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AlphonseCapone

Following me around?

 

A bit creepy.

 

Less creepy than you constantly making comments about my youthfulness. 

 

To be fair to Trapper, excepting foreign policy, the SNP position is a,in to that of New Labour under Blair. It's New Labour in a yellow rosette.

 

To be fair to Trapper he talks shite on basically every occasion, you've made a point up out of him not actually making a point.

 

Did anyone see QT last night? :rofl: a right good balanced audience eh! The Dundee Tory branch bussed in from morningside to gloat and pull themselves into a frenzy over the GERS figures!

 

It was embarrassing eh. The Lib Dems, Tories and Labour once again proving how in synch they are.

 

Patrick Harvie was great last night I thought, wish more folk would listen to him. I especially thought he was the only one who was spot on regarding the Queen.

Edited by hmfcbyt
Link to post
Share on other sites
AlphonseCapone

The electorate have been lied to by the SNP - if there had been a yes vote in the referendum we would be up shit creek now .I voted yes but wont be doing so again and wont be voting SNP in the coming elections . The behaviour of the cyber nats post referendum was also disgusting towards the elderly electorate . Jimmy Cranky oot.

 

Scottish Independence doesn't equal SNP totalitarian state.

 

The fact you ended with Jimmy Crank oot suggests you are talking shite about voting Yes or are a moron.

Link to post
Share on other sites
coconut doug

Ireland is suffering huge wealth inequality from the crash. Worse than Scotland. Figures look good but itself debatable if the positive figures are being felt by the majority of the people.

 

Oil fund might've been a good idea in 1982 but its 2016 and the time has come to move on. It's a dirty, greenhouse gas producing dinosaur which is diminished and its value reduced.

 

Scotland wanted into NATO were all nations shelter under the nuclear umbrella. No pay, but gain? Equally the UK's place in the UN is as much down to its economy and soft power influence as it is nuclear bombs. However, I do get your point. Yet it should be noted in 1945/6 when the UN came about only one power was a nuclear nation. So security council permanent seats aren't necessarily based on the bomb.

The most recent figures show Ireland having 25% more GDP per capita than the U.K. Even when PPP is factored in the figure exceeds the U.K. by more than 10% 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita 2014 figures.

 

When it comes to income distribution Ireland is again far better than the U.K. ranking amongst the best in the world whereas the U.K. is amongst the worst. Perhaps more salient is that Ireland's wealth is becoming more evenly distributed whilst in the U.K it is becoming more concentrated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality  In the E.U. only Portugal is worse than the U.K. and even then it's by a very small amount.

 

You say you don't agree with the figures but other sources I found show the same as those linked. The differences between the U.K. and Ireland are now substantial and growing yet you claim the opposite. I'd like to see your evidence not least because according to your assertion the Irish are missing out on a better together dividend. If they knew what you know, perhaps they would start clamouring for an enlarged United kingdom.

 

"Huge wealth inequality from the crash you say", Where's your evidence?

 

I'm also not aware of any suggestion that Scotland would not be prepared to pay to be in Nato. Are you suggesting that we are beggars or that we would not be prepared to take our share of responsibility? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The most recent figures show Ireland having 25% more GDP per capita than the U.K. Even when PPP is factored in the figure exceeds the U.K. by more than 10%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita 2014 figures.

 

When it comes to income distribution Ireland is again far better than the U.K. ranking amongst the best in the world whereas the U.K. is amongst the worst. Perhaps more salient is that Ireland's wealth is becoming more evenly distributed whilst in the U.K it is becoming more concentrated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality In the E.U. only Portugal is worse than the U.K. and even then it's by a very small amount.

 

You say you don't agree with the figures but other sources I found show the same as those linked. The differences between the U.K. and Ireland are now substantial and growing yet you claim the opposite. I'd like to see your evidence not least because according to your assertion the Irish are missing out on a better together dividend. If they knew what you know, perhaps they would start clamouring for an enlarged United kingdom.

 

"Huge wealth inequality from the crash you say", Where's your evidence?

 

Obviously I am working at the moment and unable to provide you a break down. However, I am not arguing that the Irish are asking to get back in. I am saying the grass isn't always greener.

 

One of the reasons, cited in a variety of newspapers and commentators, for the reshaping of Irish politics was an inequality of wealth and a feeling the recovery wasn't benefiting all.

 

I'm also not aware of any suggestion that Scotland would not be prepared to pay to be in Nato. Are you suggesting that we are beggars or that we would not be prepared to take our share of responsibility?

Nope. Not beggars. My point is that an anti-nuclear nation is engaged in mass hypocrisy to sign up to NATO and shelter under the nuclear umbrella.

 

New Zealand walked out of ANZUS in the 80s over it. Why do you want Scotland committed to 2% of gdp on defence when you could be free of that and able to not adhere to NATO dictat? Like Ireland etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nope. Not beggars. My point is that an anti-nuclear nation is engaged in mass hypocrisy to sign up to NATO and shelter under the nuclear umbrella.

 

 

 

But it doesn't preclude NATO membership.  Denmark, for example.

 

From here, http://nwp.ilpi.org/?p=2317, I found this quite interesting

 

POLICIES ADOPTED AT NATIONAL LEVEL

NATO member states have, since the early days of the Alliance, reserved the right to adopt independent national policies on nuclear weapons. Some of these restrict participation in the nuclear weapons activities of the Alliance, without restricting these states from participating in the work of the Alliance more generally. As indicated by the examples below, this right has been reserved by nuclear-armed and non-nuclear-armed states alike, suggesting that a precedent exists for allowing individual member states flexibility vis-?-vis policies agreed at the inter-governmental level.

  1. Deployment of nuclear weapons is prohibited in Denmark, Norway, and Spain (in peacetime), as well as Iceland and Lithuania (no distinction between war- and peacetime).
  2. Visits by nuclear-capable naval units are restricted in Iceland, Denmark and Norway.
  3. France does not participate in NATO?s arrangements for collective nuclear planning. Its nuclear weapons are not assigned to NATO, and its nuclear strategy is guided by national priorities, in the past often at odds with the preferences of other Allies.
  4. NATO?s claim to be a nuclear alliance rests upon its nuclear-armed members? willingness to make their nuclear weapons available for collective defence arrangements. Any doctrinal changes in the UK and the US may as a result bear on NATO?s nuclear posture.

Last one is quite pertinent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The electorate have been lied to by the SNP - if there had been a yes vote in the referendum we would be up shit creek now .I voted yes but wont be doing so again and wont be voting SNP in the coming elections . The behaviour of the cyber nats post referendum was also disgusting towards the elderly electorate . Jimmy Cranky oot.

yes, I am sure you voted YES                                    

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it was just a randomly picked audience that saw good reason to call Swinney and the SNP out for the frauds that they are.

2 labour activists get to ask questions, one of whom was a friend of Jenny Marra, pure coincidence I am sure. One of them was chucked out the party for comparing YES voters to Hitler Youth. the BBC once again showing themselves up as totally anti-SNP and a disgrace   

Link to post
Share on other sites

The electorate have been lied to by the SNP - if there had been a yes vote in the referendum we would be up shit creek now .I voted yes but wont be doing so again and wont be voting SNP in the coming elections . The behaviour of the cyber nats post referendum was also disgusting towards the elderly electorate . Jimmy Cranky oot.

I smell shite.
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 labour activists get to ask questions, one of whom was a friend of Jenny Marra, pure coincidence I am sure. One of them was chucked out the party for comparing YES voters to Hitler Youth. the BBC once again showing themselves up as totally anti-SNP and a disgrace

Hahaha. You're embarrassing yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Trapper John McIntyre

Scottish Independence doesn't equal SNP totalitarian state.

 

The fact you ended with Jimmy Crank oot suggests you are talking shite about voting Yes or are a moron

 

Come on Junior, everyone seems to be talking shite except you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on Junior, everyone seems to be talking shite except you.

:D

Cmon Traps, you don't think he voted yes either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

A yes city, with no Scots in the audience.

Paranoia, project fear, everyone against Scotland etc. Pathetic. They were asking questions the SNP have no answer to which is why you are deflecting onto claims of bias. Same happened in the referendum - currency plan B? Erm, BBC hate us! Boo BBC!

 

There were many SNP supporters in the audience, noted when as usual they applaud after anything Swinney said. The most bizarre was when Swinney stated that there would be an independent body looking at Scotland's finances - something he was railroaded into against his will by the uk government as part of the Scotland bill negotiations. Swinney had even previously persuaded the majority SNP members of the committee (think Scottish House of Lords equivalent) to change their mind on an earlier decision to have one. The audience asked the questions that needed to be asked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paranoia, project fear, everyone against Scotland etc. Pathetic. They were asking questions the SNP have no answer to which is why you are deflecting onto claims of bias. Same happened in the referendum - currency plan B? Erm, BBC hate us! Boo BBC!

There were many SNP supporters in the audience, noted when as usual they applaud after anything Swinney said. The most bizarre was when Swinney stated that there would be an independent body looking at Scotland's finances - something he was railroaded into against his will by the uk government as part of the Scotland bill negotiations. Swinney had even previously persuaded the majority SNP members of the committee (think Scottish House of Lords equivalent) to change their mind on an earlier decision to have one. The audience asked the questions that needed to be asked.

Didn't watch it, I don't watch live BBC. No licence fee.

It matters not a jot, because we won't have to bother with the EBC/UKBC much longer with UKexit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn

Less creepy than you constantly making comments about my youthfulness.

 

 

To be fair to Trapper he talks shite on basically every occasion, you've made a point up out of him not actually making a point.

 

 

It was embarrassing eh. The Lib Dems, Tories and Labour once again proving how in synch they are.

 

Patrick Harvie was great last night I thought, wish more folk would listen to him. I especially thought he was the only one who was spot on regarding the Queen.

Harvie's point about the Queen was a load of populist shite. :lol:

 

"If she wants a say on the EU referendum then she should become an ordinary citizen." She's not asking for a say you thick *****. Someone has blabbed about comments made by her in private. If she was campaigning to leave the EU then fine but she clearly isn't and clearly isn't going to.

 

Harvie is just a Nat clone - queen=UK therefore attack her on any grounds. Not a surprise that he's a Green with political skill like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harvie's point about the Queen was a load of populist shite. :lol:

"If she wants a say on the EU referendum then she should become an ordinary citizen." She's not asking for a say you thick *****. Someone has blabbed about comments made by her in private. If she was campaigning to leave the EU then fine but she clearly isn't and clearly isn't going to.

Harvie is just a Nat clone - queen=UK therefore attack her on any grounds. Not a surprise that he's a Green with political skill like that.

The yersel peace.
Link to post
Share on other sites

But it doesn't preclude NATO membership. Denmark, for example.

 

From here, http://nwp.ilpi.org/?p=2317, I found this quite interesting

POLICIES ADOPTED AT NATIONAL LEVEL

NATO member states have, since the early days of the Alliance, reserved the right to adopt independent national policies on nuclear weapons. Some of these restrict participation in the nuclear weapons activities of the Alliance, without restricting these states from participating in the work of the Alliance more generally. As indicated by the examples below, this right has been reserved by nuclear-armed and non-nuclear-armed states alike, suggesting that a precedent exists for allowing individual member states flexibility vis-?-vis policies agreed at the inter-governmental level.

  • Deployment of nuclear weapons is prohibited in Denmark, Norway, and Spain (in peacetime), as well as Iceland and Lithuania (no distinction between war- and peacetime).
  • Visits by nuclear-capable naval units are restricted in Iceland, Denmark and Norway.
  • France does not participate in NATO?s arrangements for collective nuclear planning. Its nuclear weapons are not assigned to NATO, and its nuclear strategy is guided by national priorities, in the past often at odds with the preferences of other Allies.
  • NATO?s claim to be a nuclear alliance rests upon its nuclear-armed members? willingness to make their nuclear weapons available for collective defence arrangements. Any doctrinal changes in the UK and the US may as a result bear on NATO?s nuclear posture.

Last one is quite pertinent.

What's your point Boris?

 

All I said was the NATO alliance posture is an attack on one is one on all. So defence contingencies apply. Say an independent, Scotland is attacked, it abhors and has banned the use of and deployment of nuclear weapons in Scotland. Yet in NATO it would be covered by nuclear defence regardless of its national views. That doctrinal policy shift you mention isn't there. Nuclear weapons don't need to be in Scotland to protect Scotland. It's hypocrisy.

 

Personally, I don't think if you look at where Scotland is that it needs to be in NATO. Scotland doesn't need the defence forces the SNP claim it does. Why do we need euro fighters? Or an army of 15,000? We won't be going about the world policing it. We'd lack the operationally ability to do so. So why bother spending 2% of GDP on defence as required by NATO? Why not just have enough to keep our local area safe (North Sea mainly) and to contribute to UN peacekeeping. Rest isn't needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
coconut doug

Obviously I am working at the moment and unable to provide you a break down. However, I am not arguing that the Irish are asking to get back in. I am saying the grass isn't always greener.

 

One of the reasons, cited in a variety of newspapers and commentators, for the reshaping of Irish politics was an inequality of wealth and a feeling the recovery wasn't benefiting all.

 

 

Nope. Not beggars. My point is that an anti-nuclear nation is engaged in mass hypocrisy to sign up to NATO and shelter under the nuclear umbrella.

 

New Zealand walked out of ANZUS in the 80s over it. Why do you want Scotland committed to 2% of gdp on defence when you could be free of that and able to not adhere to NATO dictat? Like Ireland etc.

On this issue, according to official figures, in Ireland , the grass is very much greener and getting greener still. They are doing better than the U.K on almost every measure after starting from a long way behind.

Do you always believe what you read in the newspapers and disbelieve the U.N.

 

Don't you think that all politics is shaped by issues around inequality and wealth and feelings that the recovery does not benefit everybody?

 

Who is this anti-nuclear nation? Do you think all members of Nato should have to support the nuclear element of the alliance? Some might think they are not sheltering under this umbrella because they do not believe it to be an effective deterrent or because they do not like nuclear weapons on principal. Others may not be happy because the nuclear weapons can only be deployed by the U.S.A. and will only be used when the U.S.A's interests are threatened.

 

 I don't want Scotland committed to 2% of spending on defence. That is current Tory and Labour policy is it not?

 

Do you really believe that Scotland will be attacked by a country that will subsequently be deterred by nuclear weapons?

 

Wasn't the Nato defence posture as you describe it, overturned when Turkey was told that Nato would not be jumping in should Turkey find itself in a war with Russia?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...