Scottish independence

[Samson]

Scotland = Oil

Black Gold under the North Sea.

England is not going to let it go anywhere.

That oil is rapidly diminishing, but the Yes side is whitewashing this.

Generally in the polls, the more educated are against this and the less educated are for it.

"Rapidly Diminishing" doesn't mean N. Sea Oil will disappear tomorrow, or within the next decade.

The UK will continue to need this strategic resource after September 18, 2014, thus, there will be no Independent Scotland.

 

[Samson]

By "Scotland went Bankrupt" I assume you mean that Scottish nobles lost money in their ill fated colonial adventures?

I am not sure what he/she means by Scotland went bankrupt. The reality is both England and Scotland were dirt poor at the time their union began. England in its attempt to rectify its poverty, started venturing out looking for new ways to generate revenue. They started arriving in India around the time India as a strong country was in its last leg. The central authority in India was disappearing fast. It lead to various warring factions in India. English started to exploit the situation by trying to establish control over territories in India. The problem was that even though India was in a chaos, it still offered stiff resistance to English. English realized that they needed much larger troop than what they had. Naturally, they approached Scots and offered them a share of the loot if Scots agreed to help English. Scots accepted the deal and the rest is history. The kind of money they were taking from India to Scotland and England totally changed their life style. They went dirt poor to rich overnight. It was this money that kept Scots in the union. Now as you can see, colonies are gone. England has only Scotland to exploit. This creates a not so very savory situation for Scots.

What English think of Scots can be judged from this old English saying:
England is for beauty
Ireland is for wit
Welsh is for deceit
Scotland is for shit

You don't have a clue on what you are talking about. Trying looking up the Darien Scheme for starters and see that in the 1690's Scotland tried to emulate all the other nations and create colonies in the new world. They failed and lost most of Scotlands money. So in return for the Act of Union England bailed Scotland out.

All good points (although I'd quibble over the total loss being less than "most of Scotland's money"). It was a large debt, and in the Act of Union, England made sure Scotland was taxed, in part, to pay down the debt.

How this could possibly be relevant more than 350 years after the event, I couldn't possibly imagine. Americans do not have the European capacity to continue centuries-old grudges.

 

[Phoenall]

You don't have a clue on what you are talking about. Trying looking up the Darien Scheme for starters and see that in the 1690's Scotland tried to emulate all the other nations and create colonies in the new world. They failed and lost most of Scotlands money. So in return for the Act of Union England bailed Scotland out.

It is you who is clueless. You have absolutely no clue what solidified English hold on Scotland; it was the gold (aka money) looted from India which was used by English to coerce Scottish elites. You are just mouthing off the propaganda you have heard in your racist circle.

BULLSHIT it was the failed colony of the Darien project that led to Scotland going cap in hand to England to pull them out of the shit. India had nothing to do with it at all. India happened 160 years after the Act of Union

 

[Phoenall]

Scotland = Oil

Black Gold under the North Sea.

England is not going to let it go anywhere.

That oil is rapidly diminishing, but the Yes side is whitewashing this.

Generally in the polls, the more educated are against this and the less educated are for it.

"Rapidly Diminishing" doesn't mean N. Sea Oil will disappear tomorrow, or within the next decade.

The UK will continue to need this strategic resource after September 18, 2014, thus, there will be no Independent Scotland.

A pity then that the scots who were in power for most of the 1990's and early 2000's gave all the oil away in return for more debt to pay the welfare bills of the immigrants. Why are we so reliant on Russian gas when we have so much under the North Sea. Why do we import so much of our oil from other nations at sky high prices if we have so much under the North sea.

 

[Phoenall]

By "Scotland went Bankrupt" I assume you mean that Scottish nobles lost money in their ill fated colonial adventures?

I am not sure what he/she means by Scotland went bankrupt. The reality is both England and Scotland were dirt poor at the time their union began. England in its attempt to rectify its poverty, started venturing out looking for new ways to generate revenue. They started arriving in India around the time India as a strong country was in its last leg. The central authority in India was disappearing fast. It lead to various warring factions in India. English started to exploit the situation by trying to establish control over territories in India. The problem was that even though India was in a chaos, it still offered stiff resistance to English. English realized that they needed much larger troop than what they had. Naturally, they approached Scots and offered them a share of the loot if Scots agreed to help English. Scots accepted the deal and the rest is history. The kind of money they were taking from India to Scotland and England totally changed their life style. They went dirt poor to rich overnight. It was this money that kept Scots in the union. Now as you can see, colonies are gone. England has only Scotland to exploit. This creates a not so very savory situation for Scots.

What English think of Scots can be judged from this old English saying:
England is for beauty
Ireland is for wit
Welsh is for deceit
Scotland is for shit

You don't have a clue on what you are talking about. Trying looking up the Darien Scheme for starters and see that in the 1690's Scotland tried to emulate all the other nations and create colonies in the new world. They failed and lost most of Scotlands money. So in return for the Act of Union England bailed Scotland out.

All good points (although I'd quibble over the total loss being less than "most of Scotland's money"). It was a large debt, and in the Act of Union, England made sure Scotland was taxed, in part, to pay down the debt.

How this could possibly be relevant more than 350 years after the event, I couldn't possibly imagine. Americans do not have the European capacity to continue centuries-old grudges.

It is all down to Scots racism towards the English that has been ongoing since the Act of Union, without which Scotland would have faced destitution and saw most of its population die through starvation.

 

[Toro]

"Rapidly Diminishing" doesn't mean N. Sea Oil will disappear tomorrow, or within the next decade.

The UK will continue to need this strategic resource after September 18, 2014, thus, there will be no Independent Scotland.

Oil production is down something like 70% since 1999.

 

[1776]

I would love to see the English pound fall, since it would make my trips there cheaper.

 

[montelatici]

This is a serious thing. If the Scots vote to remain with the UK, they will have to shut up and never again praise the Bruce, Mary Queen of Scots etc. I don't know what i would do if I were Scottish. I suspect the Basques and the Catalans are envying the Scots now. And the Irish, if they had waited they might have been able to have the whole island.

 

[1776]

but tell us shitstain, are the imaginary "Nazis" in Ukraine really behind this too.....

This is a serious thing. If the Scots vote to remain with the UK, they will have to shut up and never again praise the Bruce, Mary Queen of Scots etc. I don't know what i would do if I were Scottish. I suspect the Basques and the Catalans are envying the Scots now. And the Irish, if they had waited they might have been able to have the whole island.

 

[JWBooth]

Alba gu bràth!

 

[1776]

Maybe Putin will have to send his "little green men" to Scotland to appease the locals.....

 

[Vikrant]

BULLSHIT it was the failed colony of the Darien project that led to Scotland going cap in hand to England to pull them out of the shit. India had nothing to do with it at all. India happened 160 years after the Act of Union

English started to arrive in India in 1600. They started to get foot foothold in India around late 1600. But as I said earlier, they lacked adequate troop level to do the job. They made a proposal to Scots to join them in loot of India franchise called East India Company. Scots accepted that proposal around 1707. After that, shares in East India Company were extended to Scots (elites). That is when your union was formed. Fueled by Scottish troops, resurgent English started to build a game plan to control Indian territories. Their first major victory came in the battle of Plassey in 1757 when they captured Bengal. As a matter of fact the dude, Cornwallis who commanded the British troop in India was sent over to the U.S. to quell the rebellion here. That was sometime after 1760. However, Cornwallis was defeated by George Washington in 1781 and that was the end of the climax of his career.

That is the timeline for you.

 

[Samson]

"Rapidly Diminishing" doesn't mean N. Sea Oil will disappear tomorrow, or within the next decade.

The UK will continue to need this strategic resource after September 18, 2014, thus, there will be no Independent Scotland.

Oil production is down something like 70% since 1999.

Yes, and its projected to decrease from today's production by 50% by about 2021. What's your point? England should just give up Scotland and control of strategic resources today because production will be down tomorrow? Better to wait until 2030, after there's nothing left.

 

[Vikrant]

If there is still oil left then it will be very irresponsible for Scottish to squander that. They should gain their independence. Use the oil money to invest in their infrastructure just like Norway did. This will raise the standard of living in Scotland just like it did in Norway. Norway today has extremely high standard of living.

 

[Vikrant]

Yes, and its projected to decrease from today's production by 50% by about 2021. What's your point? England should just give up Scotland and control of strategic resources today because production will be down tomorrow? Better to wait until 2030, after there's nothing left.

I do not think England has a say in it. The decision will be entirely of Scottish people. This a referendum not a war.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I'm a yank, with Scot/Irish heritage. From that perspective, I tend to lean toward Scottish independence.

Yet, as a yank, I admire and respect the United Kingdom, as center of the history of English speaking people's traditions. Us Americans really like the traditions and history of the UK. With only a couple hundred years on our own, it is fascinating to see UK tradition go so far back in time.

The bottom line is that I don't know enough about the economies involved, so, I guess that this yank would simply make the emotional appeal of, "Don't change a thing, UK!"

 

[Phoenall]

This is a serious thing. If the Scots vote to remain with the UK, they will have to shut up and never again praise the Bruce, Mary Queen of Scots etc. I don't know what i would do if I were Scottish. I suspect the Basques and the Catalans are envying the Scots now. And the Irish, if they had waited they might have been able to have the whole island.

You do know that the Scots are the most anti muslim nation in the world after what happened to Kris Donald, and they will beat the living crap out of any muslim they find. So don't go there if you value your health

 

[Phoenall]

BULLSHIT it was the failed colony of the Darien project that led to Scotland going cap in hand to England to pull them out of the shit. India had nothing to do with it at all. India happened 160 years after the Act of Union

English started to arrive in India in 1600. They started to get foot foothold in India around late 1600. But as I said earlier, they lacked adequate troop level to do the job. They made a proposal to Scots to join them in loot of India franchise called East India Company. Scots accepted that proposal around 1707. After that, shares in East India Company were extended to Scots (elites). That is when your union was formed. Fueled by Scottish troops, resurgent English started to build a game plan to control Indian territories. Their first major victory came in the battle of Plassey in 1757 when they captured Bengal. As a matter of fact the dude, Cornwallis who commanded the British troop in India was sent over to the U.S. to quell the rebellion here. That was sometime after 1760. However, Cornwallis was defeated by George Washington in 1781 and that was the end of the climax of his career.

That is the timeline for you.

The English arrived in India to trade as private concerns, not as a national body. They started the East India Company to trade in spice in 1600. The Dutch became the majority party after the English left in 1622. This was the case until William of Orange became King of England and the wars between England and the Dutch ended. The English trade in textiles overtook the trade in spice and became the most lucrative. It was not until 1757 when England went to war in India and it was from this point on they realised they could defeat India by taking it one small province at a time. So you see it was nothing to do with the Scots and they played no role in the matter until the start of the RAJ in 1858.

 

[Phoenall]

If there is still oil left then it will be very irresponsible for Scottish to squander that. They should gain their independence. Use the oil money to invest in their infrastructure just like Norway did. This will raise the standard of living in Scotland just like it did in Norway. Norway today has extremely high standard of living.

You might be able to read, but you don't understand what you are reading. A high standard of living comes at a cost, and in this case it means higher prices. So a chicken fillet costing $1 in the US will cost $10 in Norway.

 

[Phoenall]

Yes, and its projected to decrease from today's production by 50% by about 2021. What's your point? England should just give up Scotland and control of strategic resources today because production will be down tomorrow? Better to wait until 2030, after there's nothing left.

I do not think England has a say in it. The decision will be entirely of Scottish people. This a referendum not a war.

IT does and it will pull the plug on Scotland if things look like going bad. For a start most of the platforms are to the south of the border making then English ( the land borders run from the south west to the north east at about 35 degrees) and the only reason Aberdeen was chosen was because it was the closest deep water port in the UK.