Jump to content

EU


Redrobbie99
 Share

Recommended Posts

To be honest, that's the Daily Mail doing their usual alarmist headlines: 'Tensions were raised when it was discovered it was carrying live missiles'. Bullpoop. It would be more of a surprise if the bloody thing wasn't armed up.

 

Russian warships transit or push the envelope on a fairly regular basis, have done for the past 30 years. Putin is showing us his capabilities.The Navies response is to deploy a warship to shadow them...where possible. Let's face it, you can track a warship with aircraft and EW kit just as well so you don't actually need to send a warship - that's just a good exercise  for the troops and 'showing' the other side. 

Certainly these incidents appear to be on the increase, but given that Western influence is encroaching into countries that were once closely linked with Russia and the current troubles in the Crimea and Ukraine, it's hardly surprising

 

It's always been a game of popping up and seeing if you get a response - they do it to us and we certainly have no qualms about sneaking up on them. We once shadowed the Kiev and her destroyer escorts all the way from Gib up to Murmansk. I've some cracking foties somewhere of our lone Type 42 slap bang in the middle of a group of Russian warships who were refuelling in the Barents Sea - and that's well inside the Russians own stomping ground.

 

BTW: The Russians also get a bit uppity if Western warships go in the Black Sea - which they are perfectly entitled to do so for a set period of time: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/74941

 

Do we have enough naval capability? No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The BBC also covered the story . My main point was it takes the RN at least 24 hours to respond to these threats from their bases in the south-coast of England .If the main threat is from Russia then it would make sense for RN ships to be based in the Northern Islands where they would be in a position to respond instantly . Incidentally the first the UK government was aware of the Russian battle group was when a concerned Orkney resident phoned them to say were they aware that a Russian aircraft carrier and a large number of warships was steaming past Orkney so much for our early warning capabilities  . http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-16276032

Edited by Redrobbie99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the main threat is from Russia.....

 

That's what they would like you to believe, it works best when the bogey man is consistent and the biggest one you can find.

 

As Scorrie says, its all about E vs. W  poking each other with pointy sticks from time to time, always has been.

 

Don't get me wrong, a northern Naval Base would be fine with me, it could even be good for us depending on where exactly it was sited, but I don't think anything Putin is up to can justify it. Not when it wasn't justified post war when the Kremlin was considerably more aggressive and unpredictable than now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Northern Ireland, Wales and England accepted the Independence vote on Scotland leaving or remaining in the UK.

As it happens the good people of Scotland voted to remain in the UK, and as a bonus they have more powers.

 

The UK has now voted and has chosen to leave the EU. BREXIT

 

How would Scotland react if Northern Ireland, Wales, and England had a vote on should Scotland remain part of the UK?

 

Does the EU really want Scotland to join as an independent country?

 

Does the EU not already have thriving countries like Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Italy?

 

Does Scotland really want Independence from England(UK) just  to join the EU as an Independent country? 

 

Any views?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicola Steurgon  wants to remain part of the EU so that she is different from the rest of the UK so she can get another indy ref.

 

The Scots did not vote for Scotland to remain part of the EU they voted on the ballot paper for the UK to remain part of the EU.

These are 2 completely different questions.

 

Scotland would be worse off being in the EU on its own. Clearly Scotland does not have the funds.

 

Where would the rest of EU get the money from to support Scotland with Britain coming out of the EU with all the money they put in.

 

The EU would not want another sponger putting little or nothing  in.

 

Nicola is just wanting money from Europe and indy from UK, it doesn't matter to her if it's better for Scotland or not.

 

She should concentrate on trying to govern Scotland and making Scotland a better place within Britain.

 

Goodness knows how much money she is wasting of our taxes on jolly trips around Europe when she should be running Scotland - she is becoming a complete embarrassment to the Scottish nation.

Edited by wotsit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this moment in time what with a depressed oil sector, terrorist activity, and general unrest in the world markets would Scotland be at an advantage in stepping out on it's own?....my own personal thoughts are no.

 

We as an independent nation would have to fund presumably our Defence - (Air Force, Navy, Army), Education, for our kids, Health funding for an ever increasing elderly population, Transport and i'm sure a lot more things. All that costs money that has to come from somewhere. 

 

Our rich fishing grounds are soon to be EU free, free from utterly farcical regulations and red tape. To give that straight back to Brussels and their gravy train would surely be barmy.

 

The SNP are a dangerous lot, their only concerned with independence no matter what the cost long term to Scotland. I agree with the above poster, yes get the best possible terms for us within the Union (which was fairly won in Indy Ref 1) and concentrate on governing Scotland, thus spending less time on massaging personal ego's within the SNP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Does Shetland get a raw deal from the SNP Gov as we keep returning a Liberal MSP?"

 

On the face of it, Shetland doesn't appear to get much of a deal from Holyrood, whether or not that's the result of SNP attitude or a financing formula stacked against Shetland's circumstances it would take time and research to say. Whether its got anything to do with not returning an SNP MSP, can only ever be supposition.

 

"Does the SNP Gov look at Shetland and think they have nothing to lose?"

 

Who knows? But if they do, it would be highly arrogant and reckless on their part.

 

"Would things change if Shetland was a solid SNP zone?"

 

Change? Almost certainly. Improve? That, I suspect would be very much a matter of opinion.

 

"What has the SNP done for Shetland?"

 

Nothing that other Governments haven't done (and on occasion better) before them I can think of.

 

Lets face it, we're so far out of sight, and therefore out of mind to whoever is in Holyrood or Westminster, we're forgotten and ignored unless we shout a lot very loudly, and there's barely been whispers heading in that direction for a very long time. An MSP, or MP, however good they may be can only do so much, they need back up from other politicians further down the Totem too, and thats simply not been there these last 25 years. Too many people at a local level too busy building their ivory towers or enjoying the gravy train to be worrying about local govt/national govt issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our rich fishing grounds are soon to be EU free, free from utterly farcical regulations and red tape.

 

 

Free to be exploited to the point where there are no fish left? EU regulations were brought in to save fishermen from themselves. You're maybe too young to remember the days of two crews working a boat 24/7 and black fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Free to be exploited to the point where there are no fish left? EU regulations were brought in to save fishermen from themselves. You're maybe too young to remember the days of two crews working a boat 24/7 and black fish.

 

 

Bluntly, this is disingenuous europhile propganda.

 

What evidence is there to suggest fishing to extinction will happen? Having neared the point of doing irrecoverable damage to some species, surely both fishermen and governments have learned from that experience and its resonable to expect both to move forward bearing that knowledge in mind. Not revert to pre-1973 knowledge and attitudes.

 

Pre-1973 despite ever increasing catching ability, fishing to extinction was nothing more than a theory, for any species. In the years thereafter it became a reality, and as by then the EEC had been granted supreme powers over all EEC nation's fishing activity, it was their job to address the issue. To suggest that it needed the EEC to save fishermen from themselves, is by default to suggest that had the UK not been in the EEC when fishing to extinction became a real possibility, that the UK Government wouldn't have done a thing to address it. The EEC did what they did, as it was where the buck stopped at that time, and theres nothing to suggest that had the buck stopped anywhere else at that time they wouldn't have taken similar action.

 

It could as easily be argued that the final straw that led to a real risk of fishing to extinction was the fault of the EEC and they were just fixing what they'd broken in the first place. As I remember before the days of black fish and dual crews, when the sea down the east side was thick with Danish and other pout boats (which had been allowed in by the EEC) hardly one of them under 100ft long, and load until the decks were awash if they had the chance, from scooping up everything that swam, including the immature of numerous species, including those that came to be "at risk" only a few years later, to drag home for fishmeal.

Link to comment
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.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...