Scottish referendum: 18th September

[hhunaeh]

It's astonishing to see the very people who have opposed Kashmir's right to self determination tooth and nail to the point of refusing it the right to a plebiscite, now quietly cheering on the breakup of the United Kingdom. Unlike Kashmir and its occupiers, there has been no rancour between England and Scotland for the last couple of hundred years. They are one people, share common cultures, and have both sides of the bloodline running across myriad families. There have been no less than seven Prime Ministers of Scottish origins steering Britain through the ages. You could hardly say the same about Kashmir. I am pretty confident of the Scottish vote. I know the Scots will stay with the UK. Give the Kashmiris half a chance though, and they'll bolt. But that's the difference between the two countries, I guess. Honesty and fairness runs through Britain's fabric, traits which Indians can neither identify with, nor understand, mired in self preservation that they are. I doubt any other country outside the Anglosphere would have the courage and integrity to offer this referendum to separatists. Certainly not India. Double standards as usual. One rule for them and one for us. Who would have thunk it?

It is easy for a rich, educated and self assured nation to have the qualities you describe. And we all know how countries in Anglosphere got there and stay there. They do sh*t elsewhere so that you can have all the fairness at home. Give us back what you taken from us and give us time and we will be better than you.

[FischerTal]

It is easy for a rich, educated and self assured nation to have the qualities you describe. And we all know how countries in Anglosphere got there and stay there. They do sh*t elsewhere so that you can have all the fairness at home. Give us back what you taken from us and give us time and we will be better than you.

Finally we agree on something :icflove:

[hhunaeh]

Finally we agree on something :icflove:

hmm.. other than the obvious issue, i have agreed with many things you have said in the past :cantstop:

[North Sea Tiger]

I would say the cathlotics in Northern Ireland would push that territory towards independence. Especially with current demographics. Maybe you would actually have a point if NI was offered the vote. Look closely at the SNP, its packed with Irish heritage catholics, Alex Salmond aside. Secondly its pretty stupid to compare scottish independence to say kashmir. The truth is Scotland is only now attempting independence because they have the shield of grouping of the european union to fall back on. The ultimate aim is the euro. Its the same common travel area. Scotland would not even contemplate independence if it was not for the safety net of the euro.

A bit of history on the bolded part. Scotland has been contemplating independence since 1974 in the form of a push for devolution. Long before the EU or the Euro. It took until 2011 to form a majority SNP government and then launch the Independence campaign. Check the timeline in the link below - especially from 1979 onwards. http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-timeline-to-referendum-1-3004452 As for Northern Ireland, take a look at this. http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2009/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html I live and work in Scotland and I will be voting Yes on Thursday. Would love to hear more from others in this forum who live in Scotland and are eligible to vote.

[The Outsider]

It's astonishing to see the very people who have opposed Kashmir's right to self determination tooth and nail to the point of refusing it the right to a plebiscite, now quietly cheering on the breakup of the United Kingdom. Unlike Kashmir and its occupiers, there has been no rancour between England and Scotland for the last couple of hundred years. They are one people, share common cultures, and have both sides of the bloodline running across myriad families. There have been no less than seven Prime Ministers of Scottish origins steering Britain through the ages. You could hardly say the same about Kashmir. I am pretty confident of the Scottish vote. I know the Scots will stay with the UK. Give the Kashmiris half a chance though, and they'll bolt. But that's the difference between the two countries, I guess. Honesty and fairness runs through Britain's fabric, traits which Indians can neither identify with, nor understand, mired in self preservation that they are. I doubt any other country outside the Anglosphere would have the courage and integrity to offer this referendum to separatists. Certainly not India. Double standards as usual. One rule for them and one for us. Who would have thunk it?

Though I don't see any compelling reason as to why Scotland should secede, and ergo I am not a target audience for your post, the equivalency you have drawn with Kashmir is false on many levels and aspects. India had agreed to a plebiscite in Kashmir on a world forum. The world forum had laid down certain conditions for a plebiscite in chronological order, which were not met by Pakistan. In the meanwhile India and Pakistan went through multiple wars. It was decided that all India and Pakistan issues will be dealt bilaterally, which still does not exclude the possibility of a plebiscite, but again the first condition for it has never been met by Pakistan. In the meanwhile, the demographics of the region have changed, armed militancy is still a huge problem, and parts of Kashmir have been taken over or willingly given to China. In short, it is a mess nowhere comparable to the British-Scottish situation.

[Marco Polo]

It's astonishing to see the very people who have opposed Kashmir's right to self determination tooth and nail to the point of refusing it the right to a plebiscite, now quietly cheering on the breakup of the United Kingdom. Unlike Kashmir and its occupiers, there has been no rancour between England and Scotland for the last couple of hundred years. They are one people, share common cultures, and have both sides of the bloodline running across myriad families. There have been no less than seven Prime Ministers of Scottish origins steering Britain through the ages. You could hardly say the same about Kashmir. I am pretty confident of the Scottish vote. I know the Scots will stay with the UK. Give the Kashmiris half a chance though, and they'll bolt. But that's the difference between the two countries, I guess. Honesty and fairness runs through Britain's fabric, traits which Indians can neither identify with, nor understand, mired in self preservation that they are. I doubt any other country outside the Anglosphere would have the courage and integrity to offer this referendum to separatists. Certainly not India. Double standards as usual. One rule for them and one for us. Who would have thunk it?

unlike Kashmiri Muslims, Scotland people didn't kill a particular community in thousands in the name of a god. They didn't force that particular community to live like cattles in relief camps outside Scotland . Kashmiri Muslims did that to pundits. How do you justify that?

[G_B_]

A bit of history on the bolded part. Scotland has been contemplating independence since 1974 in the form of a push for devolution. Long before the EU or the Euro. It took until 2011 to form a majority SNP government and then launch the Independence campaign. Check the timeline in the link below - especially from 1979 onwards. http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-timeline-to-referendum-1-3004452 As for Northern Ireland, take a look at this. http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2009/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html I live and work in Scotland and I will be voting Yes on Thursday. Would love to hear more from others in this forum who live in Scotland and are eligible to vote.

Big difference between devolution which uses the came currency controlled from London and out and out independence with mostly a difference currency. Even the Welsh have their own assembly with SNP counterpart Plaid Cymru having the ultimate aim for independence. The SNP have always existed since the arrival of oil but have always been a fringe party till the last 15 years or so. They had not been able to make the inroads in the working class dock working families of Glasgow. Initially Salmond envisioned a nordic arc of propensity and wanted Scotland to be part of the euro with close links to Denmark etc. With the financial crisis he has had to rethink what he wants. In that sense he was forced into the independence question. Won a majority in the assembly. Had to ask for the vote. Scotland would probably be odds on for the yes vote if everything was fine in the euro area. They would go from the pound to the euro with ease. That social attitude survey is also worth little. The Yes vote in this campaign gained momentum only after the second debate of Salmond v Darling. Otherwise the No camp had a comfortable lead. Heavy campaigning can lead to major changes closer to a vote.

[zubinpepsi]

Honesty and fairness run through britian's fabric??... :hysterical: comeon tell me you had a chuckle there when you wrote that..:--D

[North Sea Tiger]

Big difference between devolution which uses the came currency controlled from London and out and out independence with mostly a difference currency. Even the Welsh have their own assembly with SNP counterpart Plaid Cymru having the ultimate aim for independence. The SNP have always existed since the arrival of oil but have always been a fringe party till the last 15 years or so. They had not been able to make the inroads in the working class dock working families of Glasgow. Initially Salmond envisioned a nordic arc of propensity and wanted Scotland to be part of the euro with close links to Denmark etc. With the financial crisis he has had to rethink what he wants. In that sense he was forced into the independence question. Won a majority in the assembly. Had to ask for the vote. Scotland would probably be odds on for the yes vote if everything was fine in the euro area. They would go from the pound to the euro with ease. That social attitude survey is also worth little. The Yes vote in this campaign gained momentum only after the second debate of Salmond v Darling. Otherwise the No camp had a comfortable lead. Heavy campaigning can lead to major changes closer to a vote.

Wrong on so many parts. See the link I posted again. Here is a quote: 1928: The SNL helps the Glasgow University Scottish Nationalist Association form the National Party of Scotland (NPS), with the key aim of establishing a separate Scottish state. 1934: The NPS merges with the Scottish Party, an organisation favouring home rule formed by former Conservative Party members. The Scottish National Party (SNP) is formed. The SNP was formed in 1934 and Oil was discovered in the early 1970s. They ceased to be a fringe party when Winnie Ewing won the by-election from Hamilton in 1967. Again, before the oil. As I said, I live in Scotland and I have seen the Independence campaign gather momentum long before the debate you are talking about. It is only after the Yougov poll that people down south started to take notice of what is happening in Scotland. I have a photo which I took in Edinburgh in 2011 of posters which talk about an Independent Scotland. This was soon after the SNP gaining their first majority in Holyrood. http://imgur.com/SBoqHRN You are right that the Welsh have Plaid Cymru as one of the parties but they have to win a majority in their devolved parliament first before they can launch their bid for independence. This is what SNP were able to achieve in Scotland. The Guardian did a short video on the Plaid Cymru a couple of days ago. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/sep/16/plaid-cymru-wales-scotland-independence-video Finally, regarding your comments about Salmond: This is not an election. This is not about what Salmond did or what Salmond said. This is a referendum and the outcome of which will have an impact long after Salmond and others like him.

[Sachin=GOD]

They have voted NO. Sad.

[North Sea Tiger]

Lets see if Devo Max materialises. I won't be holding my breath.

[Number]

Ok. Now can we have one in Bradford ?

[G_B_]

=dp

[G_B_]

Wrong on so many parts. See the link I posted again. Here is a quote: 1928: The SNL helps the Glasgow University Scottish Nationalist Association form the National Party of Scotland (NPS), with the key aim of establishing a separate Scottish state. 1934: The NPS merges with the Scottish Party, an organisation favouring home rule formed by former Conservative Party members. The Scottish National Party (SNP) is formed. The SNP was formed in 1934 and Oil was discovered in the early 1970s. They ceased to be a fringe party when Winnie Ewing won the by-election from Hamilton in 1967. Again, before the oil. As I said, I live in Scotland and I have seen the Independence campaign gather momentum long before the debate you are talking about. It is only after the Yougov poll that people down south started to take notice of what is happening in Scotland. I have a photo which I took in Edinburgh in 2011 of posters which talk about an Independent Scotland. This was soon after the SNP gaining their first majority in Holyrood. http://imgur.com/SBoqHRN You are right that the Welsh have Plaid Cymru as one of the parties but they have to win a majority in their devolved parliament first before they can launch their bid for independence. This is what SNP were able to achieve in Scotland. The Guardian did a short video on the Plaid Cymru a couple of days ago. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/sep/16/plaid-cymru-wales-scotland-independence-video Finally, regarding your comments about Salmond: This is not an election. This is not about what Salmond did or what Salmond said. This is a referendum and the outcome of which will have an impact long after Salmond and others like him.

55-45 not even close..... I saw this coming. To be fair i thought it would be about 60-40. Giving the vote to 16 year olds probably skewed this. Atleast Quebec was closer. Look there has always existed independence movements. All the way back in the 1700s. In 1750 itself i think there was out and out rebellion which was crushed by the then Stuart king. The truth is you are nitpicking. The SNP emerged after the discovery of oil. Yes they probably existed in some format or other. Thats like saying the BJP existed in the 1950s as the Jan sangh.

[G_B_]

Lets see if Devo Max materialises. I won't be holding my breath.

What happened in Aberdeenshire? I assume you live in abderbeen based on your username? i thought based on your posts, that was one place odds on to vote for independence.

[North Sea Tiger]

What happened in Aberdeenshire? I assume you live in abderbeen based on your username? i thought based on your posts, that was one place odds on to vote for independence.

Yeah 58% voted No in Aberdeen. Then again, a lot of expats live in Aberdeen who weren't expected to vote Yes. On a brighter note, I will now get a pay rise! I am off to the rigs on Monday so looking forward to the banter. 45-55 is by no means a small difference and Glasgow, the dock workers heartland voted majority Yes for Independence.

[North Sea Tiger]

55-45 not even close..... I saw this coming. To be fair i thought it would be about 60-40. Giving the vote to 16 year olds probably skewed this. Atleast Quebec was closer. Look there has always existed independence movements. All the way back in the 1700s. In 1750 itself i think there was out and out rebellion which was crushed by the then Stuart king. The truth is you are nitpicking. The SNP emerged after the discovery of oil. Yes they probably existed in some format or other. Thats like saying the BJP existed in the 1950s as the Jan sangh.

Did you even bother to read the links which I have posted? You seem to have it in your own little mind that SNP existed only after the oil. BJP / Jan Sangh is a poor example because SNP has remained SNP since 1934. For the record, a lot of the 16-18 year olds have voted No. In any case it is over now. Time to move on.

[Texy]

It's astonishing to see the very people who have opposed Kashmir's right to self determination tooth and nail to the point of refusing it the right to a plebiscite, now quietly cheering on the breakup of the United Kingdom. Unlike Kashmir and its occupiers, there has been no rancour between England and Scotland for the last couple of hundred years. They are one people, share common cultures, and have both sides of the bloodline running across myriad families. There have been no less than seven Prime Ministers of Scottish origins steering Britain through the ages. You could hardly say the same about Kashmir. I am pretty confident of the Scottish vote. I know the Scots will stay with the UK. Give the Kashmiris half a chance though, and they'll bolt. But that's the difference between the two countries, I guess. Honesty and fairness runs through Britain's fabric, traits which Indians can neither identify with, nor understand, mired in self preservation that they are. I doubt any other country outside the Anglosphere would have the courage and integrity to offer this referendum to separatists. Certainly not India. Double standards as usual. One rule for them and one for us. Who would have thunk it?

You lost the plot right there. :hysterical: Leaving aside Britain's repulsive, tumultuary political, military history & administration of the subcontinent and almost all its occupied territory, I got four words 4u: Churchill deliberate Indian genocide.

[Kalia_Test]

The funniest thing in the world is calling the United Kingdom as fair . Some quotes below :- India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the equator. Churchill - Speech at Royal Albert Hall, London (18 March 1931) What is United Kindom then? It is alarming and also nauseating to see Mr. Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer of the type well-known in the East, now posing as a fakir, striding half naked up the steps of the Viceregal palace to parley on equal terms with the representative of the King-Emperor. Churchill- Comment on Gandhi's meeting with the Viceroy of India See Churchill not even able to digest an equal terms parley I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. Churchill - In conversation to Leo Amery, Secretary of State for India Oh yeah...we all know how your crusaders were against muslims There is nothing 'fair' about allowing the referendum. They had no other option. The queen can shove the fairness tag up her royal backside.

[Temujin Khaghan]

I want British Pakistanis to get their rightful share of territory in England. Since England is the "fairest country in the world", maybe they will give it :p