The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Breaking insanity news

Posted on July 10, 2013 by

If we’d seen this 15 minutes earlier, we’d have made it the And Finally… story instead of the GTA V picture. To be honest, we’re still kinda rubbing our eyes and not quite believing it. Did we just get invaded before we were even a country?

Print Friendly

    179 to “Breaking insanity news”

    1. Jiggsbro says:

      Where do we sign up for the militia? Hell, it worked for the US.

    2. Bill C says:

      As each day goes by, I become more convinced of Scottish skiers skier theory that the Tories are secretly plotting for a YES vote. I mean how else can you explain this story? Rile the natives or what?

    3. Jammach says:

      Best laugh I’ve had in ages. They might try this … In fact of course they will, but it has bugger all chance of success! Just trying to ‘remove’ a reason for people to vote Yes and get rid of the nukes. “Dear UN, we just declared ourselves Independent, in line with your conventions and we are being threatened”. I think Russia, France and Germany (all pissed off with England at present) may have an opinion on this … And the USA wouldn’t want the nukes remaining here anyway …

    4. Bill C says:

      That should of course read scottish skier.

    5. @Jammach
      On the other hand without Faslane the US would have nowhere in these islands to keep its nuclear arsenal’s outpost, so perhaps they’re keen on the base remaining with an on-message nation.

    6. Bill C says:

      Just another wee thought. I thought the Guardian was supposed to be a serious newspaper? Are they also ‘in on’ call me Dave’s plan?

    7. Mosstrooper says:

      First they ignore you ,then they laugh at you, then they come to fight you ,and then you win.  Looks like it is all coming true!

    8. Jiggsbro says:

      That should of course read scottish skier.
       
      Latest word from the government is that that should read ‘sovereign UK territory skier’.

    9. Jammach says:

      @Stewart – we’ve rather shown the USA that we have our opinions on following our own ideas and laws though … Returning dying Al-Megrahi home for example. Would they want the nukes staying in a country they couldn’t reliably dictate to? Let’s be clear, I don’t believe for a minute that any attempt to annex and retain Faslane will succeed. Rules in UN conventions about succession and all that … Surely?

    10. Joe Middleton says:

      Shocking arrogance. Scotland is not a colony yet clearly the British state thinks it can treat us as one.

    11. Dougthedug says:

      Before we get too excited about this, the Guardian article appears to be based on anonymous briefings.
       
      From the article it’s not a unilateral annexation it’s just blackmail. Let us keep the base or we’ll try and stick the costs of moving it to England on you.
       
      Rather than frightening Scots it’s more likely to put their backs up. Who’s spinning this and why?
       
      Let’s regard this more as an opportunity. If Labour fail to respond or agree with the idea then it’s quids in for us.

    12. CameronB says:

      I think Slumpy nailed it btl with “Gitmo on the Clyde”. Farcical nonsense.

    13. Bill C says:

      @Jiggsbro – Nice one. Really hope this is a load of crap though, otherwise I don’t want to think of the consequences.

    14. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Let’s regard this more as an opportunity. If Labour fail to respond or agree with the idea then it’s quids in for us.”

      There’s already a quote from Jim Murphy saying “This clearly shows how SNP BAD”.

    15. Yesitis says:

      The BBC in Scotland have the loudest tumbleweed. Breaking point coming.

    16. Atypical_Scot says:

      The Guardian, 04/01/2013.
       
      The MoD has revealed that the safety arrangements for Devonport do not permit the presence of submarines carrying Trident nuclear warheads. The MoD’s safety experts are not considering changing that.
      The problem is that the dockyard is in a densely populated area and, if there were an accident, thousands of people would be at risk. The worst accident scenario envisaged by the MoD would kill up to 11,000 people in Plymouth and would not meet the official criteria for what is acceptable, according to a new report.
       
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/04/mod-nuclear-submarines-scotland-plymouth

    17. CameronB says:

      The BBC in Scotland have the loudest tumbleweed
      🙂

    18. Bill C says:

      The Telegraph is carrying a headline about “call me Dave” saving the union. I smell fear!

    19. Dougthedug says:

      Jim Murphy has failed to condemn the idea of the rUK keeping an enclave in Scotland in order to host what will be a foreign country’s nuclear weapons beside Glasgow.
       
      JIm believes that an independent Scotland should host another country’s nuclear weapons beside its biggest city to keep that said country on the UN Security Council.
       
      You can’t get a clearer indication than that, that Jim’s not loyal to Scotland but to the other country.

    20. CameronB says:

      Aren’t there are laws preventing any country from hosting nuclear weapons ‘owned’ by another?

    21. ianbrotherhood says:

      Three Scottish politicos are named in the Guardian piece:
       
      Menzies Campbell, Jim Murphy, and, whatsiscoupon? that heid-the-ba’? oh aye, Danny Alexander.
       
      If any of these Category Five belters turned up at your front door in their civvies, and, with pointed-finger, ‘told’ you that they intended to park their their essential 4×4 in your driveway because they just didn’t have enough space for it, how long would the conversation last?
       
      Would there be any ‘conversation’ at all?

    22. Atypical_Scot says:

      UK following US long tradition, North Englandshire is Brits S. Korea.

    23. Sunshine on Crieff says:

      Wasn’t this a scare story some months ago, perhaps last year?

      I’m sure this whole ‘annexation of the Clyde’ thing has already been tried. Have they run out of fresh ideas?

    24. Lurker in the Wings says:

      The people who briefed this do not seem to know the meaning of the word blockade. A few scrap ships (plenty on the world market going cheap) full of concrete and sunk across the Loch mouth would soon sort them out. How will they supply this sovereign territory – no road traffic in or out, no seaway in or out, no fly zone- job done. We will have 2 subs @ Faslane and rump uk will have to find somewhere to berth the boat on patrol when it finishes.  Hardballs work two ways.
       

    25. Jiggsbro says:

      You can’t get a clearer indication than that, that Jim’s not loyal to Scotland but to the other country.
       
      And why shouldn’t he be? It’s his country just as much as Scotland is. We’re being asked to choose between the two countries we belong to. Some people will choose Scotland, some will choose the UK. Some will feel they don’t belong to one of those two countries. No one will be being disloyal.

    26. Jiggsbro says:

      Aren’t there are laws preventing any country from hosting nuclear weapons ‘owned’ by another?
       
      There may well be, which might explain why Westminster are discussing removing Faslane from Scotland. That way, they won’t be hosted by a foreign country, there’ll be in the UK.

    27. Hey, if you think that one is bad, try this for size. Has anyone heard of the Scottish Nationalist Party?

      How’s this for strategic thinking as an anti-indy argument in a country which is overwhelmingly anti-nuclear weapons:

      “What is now worrying officials and military chiefs in the MoD is that if they are seen to be accommodating about the status of the Trident base, their most powerful argument against Scottish independence – ie, that it would mean the end of Britain’s nuclear deterrence – will have evaporated.”

    28. James Morton says:

      so they are going to annex a port town? isn’t that an act of war? are these people that fucking dumb? Why just not enter into a treaty to keep the base and pay rent they want it so fucking much. Honestly these people are beyond the pale

    29. Indy_Scot says:

       
      It’s clearly an April fool that has somehow got messed up.
       

    30. Betsy says:

      Oh Good God. Should I start painting my legs with gravy browning and shagging American sailors in exchange for off ration treats now. Or should I wait until after we vote yes?
       

    31. Apart from which, as shovel ready projects go, the much needed causeway from Helensburgh to Rosneath would be a real boost to the economy of that peninsula. ;o)

    32. @Jammach
      Exactly – indications are that an independent Scotland would be less likely to act as a client state for the US, so they probably would not want nukes based here. Then again, where else could they be kept to maintain a constant presence in the UK? If they were returned to their home base in the Carolinas while a new base was prepared, should one even be found, would they legally be allowed to move them back here? Perhaps from the US point of view, the UK establishing an annex would seem the simplest solution.

    33. Atypical_Scot says:

      @jiggsbro;
       
      Using that rationale, the release of the ‘story’ from the MoD at this juncture into the public debate must represent something. The MoD is not entirely divorced from government, therefore it is by proxy stating that an overwhelmingly aggressive arrest of Scottish soil or the threat to do so is reflective of the UK government’s stance regarding the democratic choice of the Scottish electorate. This kind of behaviour reeks of imperialism. Even if this is not going to happen, it assumes UK authority over the will of the Scottish electorate. 
       
      I fail to see how two countries are on balanced ground on this point. The SNP has already conceded there would be a time frame required for the safe removal of Trident – a compromise if you will – returned in what kind of gesture? 

    34. kininvie says:

      Two things:
      1) The Faslane ‘enclave’ was pre-figured in the ‘extinguished Scotland’ paper, way back when. Everyone laughed it off at the time. That paper was serious. So is this.
      2) The article, if you read it carefully, is actually the MoD saying ‘OK guys, you’ve got us over a barrel – how much, and for how long?’ It’s nothing to do with ‘invasion’ or ‘insanity’ – it’s simply flying a kite…
      I’m sure everyone here is realistic enough to recognise that, whatever their personal anti-nuclear stance may be, Faslane is by far and away the biggest ace in Scotland’s hand when it comes to post-indyref negotiations. In fact, it’s such a high card, that to match it the UK is likely to concede many demands that it would not dream of doing otherwise.
      So the question is going to be – do we chuck this valuable card onto the discard pile, or do we play it? The answer to that has the potential to cause massive splits at just the wrong moment – so maybe it needs thinking about in advance a bit?
       

    35. Ron says:

      Yeah, there’s something strange about the Guardian article appearing at 9pm or so, followed within an hour or two by an editorial which to me reads as long-prepared.
       
      Odd.

    36. Ron says:

      @kininvie
       
      An attempt to cause splits in the YES camp? Quite possibly. Aided by the Guardian, no less.

    37. Tattie-boggle says:

      They really don’t have a clue about how the ordinary scot thinks. The claymores will be getting sharpened. 
      O/T there is another stoushie brewing regarding a certain power plant no links as yet but someone has been getting brown enveloped. watch this space

    38. Dcanmore says:

      It was always going to come down to two things, Trident and the black stuff, the rest is secondary.

    39. Dcanmore says:

      I’m okay with SG leasing out Faslane to rUK, lets say £40m a day for 20 years = £292 BILLION thank you very much and I’m sure the USA will stump up half of that, or you could minus around £90 billion of Scottish debt off the cost and call it an even £200 billion. DEAL!

    40. Jiggsbro says:

      It was always going to come down to two things, Trident and the black stuff, the rest is secondary.
       
      It will come down to what it always comes down to: which competing vision of the future will people see as better for themselves and those they love? Trident and oil might play a part in that, but they won’t be central for most people. It will be about jobs, mortgages, benefits, health services, education…the issues that matter in most people’s day-to-day-lives. Convince them that an independent Scotland can do better in the areas that matter to them and they won’t care one way or another about Trident or whether the economy includes oil revenues.

    41. alasdair says:

      um, not sure what the point of nuclear subs are if they can’t leave their port because they’ve been blockaded … what they going to do?  nuke themselves?!

    42. Kendomacaroonbar says:

      Faslane cannot be leased out…the Scottish navy will be based there !

    43. Adrian B says:

      Trident is going. Its not staying here. Any fun and games with the UK Government/MoD will be met with high fines of £100 Billion per Week.
       
      END OF. 

    44. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I’m sure everyone here is realistic enough to recognise that, whatever their personal anti-nuclear stance may be, Faslane is by far and away the biggest ace in Scotland’s hand when it comes to post-indyref negotiations. In fact, it’s such a high card, that to match it the UK is likely to concede many demands that it would not dream of doing otherwise.”

      That’s what this site’s been saying for a good few months. But this latest piece sounds a lot more threatening. I wonder if it’s just a bully bluff, but for what purpose? You don’t need to bully negotiations you don’t think are ever going to happen. Are they starting to fear defeat?

    45. Dcanmore says:

      @Jiggsborough …
       
      I meant it would be down to those two things from Westminster’s point of view.

    46. Adrian B says:

      Are they starting to fear defeat?
       
      Some prefer to think that they are staring defeat straight in the eye, buts thats probably still at least a year away.

    47. AnneDon says:

      Jim Murphy’s only loyalty is to his wallet, and Westminster is clearly more likely to fill that than Holyrood.
       
      That seems to be the best explanation of the stance of unionist MPs, who, without discussing anything at any party conferences, are virulently, simultaneously, anti-indy.

    48. Dcanmore says:

      @Rev … “Are they starting to fear defeat?”
       
      Yes! And it WILL go a bit Dr Strangelove until it fizzles out with normal negotiations. All those arrogant, greedy little three-shade-Tory shites in Westminster are spineless career middle managers, they don’t have the gumption for a war of attrition especially with the Americans scowling over their shoulders looking for a quick resolution.

    49. James Morton says:

      you might be on to something Rev, only a witless and clueless loser thinks he can dictate terms to the victor. I remember labour and david miliband expelling vast amounts of hot demanding the Russia agreee to peace terms after russia had kicked the living shit out of Georgia and evicted it from Ossestia and Abkazia.

    50. Lurker in the Wings says:

      Are they starting to fear defeat?    Of course they are. Notice there have been no “our polling shows”  releases from BT in ages. I doubt that they have stopped asking the questions (biased as they will be), but the answers can’t be to their liking.
        Even my unionist friends (I know, but I shower frequently) struggle with some of the more absurd arguments.
        To even think of pulling a stunt like this shows extreme desperation – a sovereign enclave can only work with consent and I don’t think any government of Scotland that tried to give such would last more than a few weeks.

    51. pmcrek says:

      Stewart Bremnar,
      The US has access to nuclear air & storage bases accross most of the world & in Europe most strategically in Turkey, giving it good strike capability across the Middle East, Russia and Caspian region. It couldnt give a toss about Faslane. Dont be fooled into thinking Trident in the UK offers  any military advantage for the US at all, its Westminsters vanity project, the US just sold them the delivery system.

    52. Braco says:

      They are simply waking up to the reality of a YES/NO vote by an electorate.
       
      I would say that it’s simple (post) imperialist panic.
       
      It’s for the same reason that politicians hate elections, they are just so unreliable! That’s why Gordon Brown spent his whole career organising his Primeministership without the need for a messy election and then avoided having the one he needed to have until the very, very last moment.
       
      In the process, turning down an almost sure chance at re election, but an election can never be sure, so he decided to just wait and hold on to the power instead.  He is an exemplar of the British Establishment’s understanding of democracy.
       
      Threatening!
       
       

    53. kininvie says:

      @rev
      You don’t need to bully negotiations you don’t think are ever going to happen. Are they starting to fear defeat?
      In a word, no, not yet, but  the MoD have been told to look at the possibility of Scottish independence, after months and months of refusing to think about it. Being new to the game, they naturally come up with the biggest scare story they can think of: to wit “It’ll cost you billions to move us, so you’d better not.”  Of course, any reason why Scotland should have to pay more than its 9% share of decomissioning costs is not made clear….
       
      And let’s be clear about this ‘sovereign territory’ business. Akrotiri is designated sovereign terriotry, because it makes the whole business of running it rather easier than if the Cypriots had to be formally approached for everthing. And in exchange, the Cypriots get some rent. But if the Cypriots wanted to turf the UK out tomorrow (or after whatever period of notice was required), they could.
      An enclave is not defensible – Faslane rather less defensible than many, I’d have said. So there’s no actual threat beyond the ‘costs’ – and they are debatable.
      The real question – which I think the MoD really is worried about – is what happens when we discover the state of contamination at Coulport, and what happens when we find out that it isn’t maybe quite what it should be? The billions may then have to flow in the other direction…
      One thing I’d insist on: before any decomissioning costs were allocated, I’d want a full radiation inspection team round every last tunnel and bunker….

    54. CameronB says:

      You simply couldn’t imagine the nasty French having the only independent nukes in Europe. What am I saying?…Doh! Vanity project and perhaps a hang-up from 1066, and all that.

    55. turnip_ghost says:

      @kininvie


      I’d have to agree completely. Hell, I’d do the tests myself!
       

    56. Jingly Jangly says:

      Manx Radio are reporting it like we are being told its a done deal we don’t get
      independence unless we agree to it.
      They are saying that they will take the billions it will cost to relocate trident of our “Settlement”
      If that’s the case we should just walk away and tell them where to shove our share of
      the debt while we are at it.
       

    57. Apart from scaring MODUK all the way to the lunatic asylum, Project Fear appears to have succeeded in scaring its own chairman into silence on the indyref.

    58. Edward Barbour says:

      @Stewart Bremner  – Actually………….. The US does have a Nuclear weapons storage facility at RAF Welford in Berkshire (have a gander on Google Earth, to see all the nice neat rows of stores just north of the M4). It also stores conventional bombs and missiles. Its a quiet location, only gets ‘busy’ when there is a conflict on.
       

    59. Yesitis says:

      Betsy
      Oh Good God. Should I start painting my legs with gravy browning and shagging American sailors in exchange for off ration treats now. Or should I wait until after we vote yes?
       
      Wait till after a Yes vote. That`s what I`m doing. Mmm…gravy.

    60. Shinty says:

      kininvie
      One thing I’d insist on: before any decomissioning costs were allocated, I’d want a full radiation inspection team round every last tunnel and bunker….

      Couldn’t agree more.

      For those of you who haven’t already seen it
      http://youtu.be/VQhGJushOEc

    61. Patrick Roden says:

      Are they realising they are losing?
       
      Yes Definitely !   Alistair Darling, (the man who has been paid thousands by a company that wants to privatise the NHS) has said that BT will be changing tact and will be more positive about the benefits of the UK from this point on.
       
      Strange as it may seem, on the very same day that David Cameron has announced that he thinks that the campaign needs to be more positive and that they need England to ‘Love-bomb’ Scotland, to show us all how much we are wanted by them.

      Why the sudden change in tactics? Because they know they are loosing the arguments and people are saying they will vote Yes in increasing numbers.
       
      Message to Mr Cameron: We know we are wanted Dave, our Oil, and the other billions that you and your like,cream from us every year must be very welcome.

    62. Patrick Roden says:

      Quoted for Truth:
      from the Guardians on-line comments,
       
      I agree with most of that, especially I think that the question of independence for Scotland is starting all kinds of discussion in other parts of the UK about different ways of doing things.
      I’m not so sure as you are that the vote will be “No”, though. I have spoken to so many people who were not in favour of Independence to begin with but now say they are so fed up of these scare stories and contempt etc., that they say (often in very surprised tones) that they haven’t decided yet but think they may vote Yes.
      Poll figures that add the Don’t Know to the No are making a big mistake. I have not so far met anyone in Scotland who says they even might not vote at all, so the Don’t Knows will vote one way or the other and while they are in the majority, nobody knows how the vote will come out.
      Whichever way the vote goes, I think what’s happening in Scotland and the fallout for Westminster does open a crack that the other countries and the regions of the UK can use to get real change.
      If I was in England, I would be hoping that this doesn’t have to mean the Little Englander English nationalism of UKIP, but can concentrate – a we in Scotland are mostly doing – on how to heal the democratic deficit and make sure we have a government that genuinely represents us.
      I thought the English region local authorities wanting more say sounded like a really good idea as a first step to breaking the deadlock that they have no representation but voted against an assembly or mayors etc.

    63. Captain Caveman says:

      As someone who is TOTALLY anti-nuclear (power, let alone weapons), I’m appalled – but not surprised. As I’ve said all along, IMO rUK will simply not allow themselves to be held to ransom by an independent Scotland over this (and more to the point, neither will NATO or the US, who very much want the European “nuclear umbrella” to remain unsullied and intact at ALL costs).
       
      At the end of the day (as Salmond has already found out) an independent Scotland would very much remain fully part of NATO and similarly – symbolic-only and pyrrihic NOMINAL “rental payments” aside – Faslane and its nukes WILL remain in rUK hands and control. Call it what you want: real politik, just the way it is… but all this talk of extorting X bazillion pounds a day out of rUK, sinking scrap ships around the base and/or raising a militia etc. is just all so much BS. It’s not going to happen.

    64. HandandShrimp says:

      What sort of lunatic would keep their primary deterrence on foreign soil up an easily blockaded channel right in the middle of a population hostile to these weapons. It is one of the most offensive things I have heard yet. It just shows the utter contempt these bastards have for Scotland. Jim Murphy is a neo-conservative poodle-hawk. Just talking about weapons seems to give him a hard on. He is too weird even to discuss.

    65. Al Ghaf says:

      Does this mean the back shift as Faslane would have to make an international call to order their pizza delivery?

      So shouldn’t the BBC headline be “Forces take away charges set to increases in Independent Scotland”

    66. Robert Louis says:

      Does this nonsense not betray to the whole world, the exact nature of the bullying colonial mindset towards Scotland, that is so pervasive in Westmidden.  Imagine, If Russia today announced that it would like to base its subs in Finland (a country which it has invaded on at least three occasions), and declare the port of Helsinki a ‘Russian sovereign enclave’.  
       
      Yet here we have a democratic small country, Scotland, holding a democratic referendum, which has been subjected to continual and repeated interference from England.  Not content with ridiculous scare stories, we are now watching as London issues direct bullying threats to the people of Scotland.  Apparently it is unsafe to move the subs to Devonport, England as it is in a densely populated area, yet it is entirely acceptable to have then fifteen minutes drive from the largest city in Scotland, and the highest density population area in Scotland.
       
      However, we need to consider the entire premise here, reporters with straight faces in England, reporting that England will just unilaterally take over part of another sovereign country to suit their own needs.  No mention of international law, no mention of the fact that England or Westminster has no mandate to behave in such an aggressive colonial fashion.  No mention that it is the kind of behaviour which causes wars.
       
      Maybe in the same manner, an independent Scotland should declare the isle of wight a Scottish enclave, as we need it for our holidays.
       
      If Scotland becomes independent, then the subs will go.  What England chooses to do with its subs is neither here nor there as far as Scotland is concerned.  The sooner they go, the better.
       
      It is time for Scotland to be rid of these wholly unsavoury and frankly evil colonial pigs in London.
       
      Vote YES in 2014, to free ALL of Scotland from London colonial rule.

    67. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      For Westminster, Scotland only matters for 4 things
       
      Fish
      Trident
      Oil
      Water
       
      If there is a No vote i would wager by M & S Y fronts on Scottish Water being privatised in double quick time and bought by a London water company.
       
      It is all about pillage and threadbare post-imperial dick waving.

    68. Jim Mitchell says:

      You just know that SOMEBODY is going to suggest that if they can do it there then why not with the whole of Scotland!
      Wonder if this is so that future HM governments can have their own versions of Guantanamo Bay, it could be useful for them given the way they are headed with human rights.

    69. scottish_skier says:

      Tomorrow’s headline.

      ‘Tories plan to reintroduce the poll tax in Scotland’.
      😉

    70. Shinty says:

      Bugger,
      Maybe we can add electricity to your list, not forgetting a dumping site for all the ‘nasty stuff’.

    71. scottish_skier says:

      Latest word from the government is that that should read ‘sovereign UK territory skier’.

      Aye, next they’ll be threatening to hold onto Cairngorm Mountain and Glenshee.

    72. Atypical_Scot says:

      @Bugger (the Panda);
       
      There will be no M & S in an iScotland so stock up on Y’s now.
       

    73. john king says:

      heres a great post for you on the Guardian page 
      wotson
      “Arise sir cameron ,hammer of the scots, and lead the invasion..brilliant , haven’t enjoyed a good civil war for ages”
      my response to him
      “your an idiot”

    74. CameronB says:

      @ Bugger (the Panda)
      Shinty beat me too it. You need to add taxes to your list, as well.

    75. john king says:

      “Oh Good God. Should I start painting my legs with gravy browning and shagging American sailors in exchange for off ration treats now. Or should I wait until after we vote yes?”
      only if they consent betsy!
       

    76. Atypical_Scot says:

      News just in;
       
      Cameron to use Trident as giant pessary.

    77. Luigi says:

      Another gift to the yes campaign. They definitely want rid of us.

    78. Luigi says:

      We’re going to the Faslane…
      We’re going to the Faslane…
      Going to the Faslane T party!

    79. HandandShrimp says:

      Atypical
       
      On himself….I hope

    80. Braco says:

      Captain Caveman,
      I think your defeatist attitude explains why England is where it is, and has no political alternative other than an even more right wing party than it’s current crop (UKIP).
       
      It aint about extorting £gzillions. Only the UK MOD has floated that idea! We want shot and shot ASAP.
       
      As for NATO, if they won’t take us without Nukes we won’t join. It’s as simple as that. There is no viable Government party in Scotland that could survive a deal like the kite being flown in this article. Again that’s another simple democratic reality that Westminster (and the USA if your sure) have been insulated from and indifferent too for at least 3 decades. That’s why we are on the brink of full Indy!
       
      All this shows is that the military, political and media (the Guardian FFS) establishment of the UK are finding it almost impossible to come to terms with the very real prospect of losing completely, the total control they have taken for granted as an absolute founding principle (much like gravity) all their days.
       
      The Nukes are going with a YES vote.
       
      Now does that not sway you, even a little, from your NO position Captain?

    81. Lianachan says:

      Bugger (the Panda)
       
      And whisky.

    82. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Cameron to use Trident as giant pessary.”

      Suppository, unless you’re either talking about a different Cameron or you know something we don’t…

    83. john king says:

      Does this mean the back shift as Faslane would have to make an international call to order their pizza delivery?
       
      dont worry, roaming call charges in and independent Scotland will make that prohibitive, we can starve them out

    84. Turnbull Drier says:

      So the only 4 things that matter to Westminster are:
      The Fish
      Trident
      The Oil
      The Water
      and the Whisky
       
      Do I sense and inverted Monty Python skectch comming on….

    85. Archibald Berwick Melrose [aka Archie] says:

      BBC News at 0935am – Number 10 Downing Street have just issued a comment retracting MOD’s fantasy. Monty Pythonesque? Anal Douche?

    86. Turnip_ghost says:

      Ach sod it. Lets do a straight up swap! They have Faslane, we get Gibraltar. Or the Falklands. 😀

    87. Atypical_Scot says:

      @Rev;
       
      No, same Cameron.

    88. Max says:

       
       
      All we need is for Al Qaeda to announce they are setting up a local terrorist branch in Garelochhead to complete the double. 
       
       

    89. scaredy cat. says:

      Mmmm. American sailors and gravy….but do I need a passport to get some of that?

    90. Macart says:

      I would dearly love to know what their private polling is telling them. I mean what on earth could prompt a facepalm like this?
       
      Any thoughts skier?

    91. raineach says:

      This is not the press release of a side that thinks it’s winning. Once the vote is Yes, our government and not their government makes the big decisions
       

    92. Doug says:

      Turnbull
      So the only 5 things that matter to Westminster are:
      The Fish
      Trident
      The Oil
      The Water
      The Whisky
       
      And the electricity…
       
      Quick, get the fags and comfy chair!

    93. roboscot says:

      And still 14 months to go …

    94. Dcanmore says:

      @Robert Louie .. Apparently it is unsafe to move the subs to Devonport, England as it is in a densely populated area, yet it is entirely acceptable to have then fifteen minutes drive from the largest city in Scotland, and the highest density population area in Scotland.”
       
      Think for a moment behind the thought process in the decision-making in Whitehall. What is considered acceptable and what is not. Nukes based at Devonport with 11,000 hard working decent people affected NOT ACCEPTABLE. Nukes based on the Clyde with up to 1 million Jocks affected: ACCEPTABLE. 
       
      “… no great mischief if they fall”

    95. naebd says:

      They’ll never get their hands on our precious water!!!!
       
      Can i make an observation? The tone of the MOD source is high-handed, but there’s no threat to unilaterally annex anything. This is a huge indignation storm stirred up masterfully but based on inventing something that isn’t even said in the fucking article. Get a grip.
       
       

    96. Spout says:

      Positive Case for the Union appearing live today (11th July 2013) for the very first time ever, here 🙂
       
      http://www.bettertogether.net/blog/entry/watch-alistair-darlings-lecture-live

    97. HandandShrimp says:

      Was Alastair on the phone saying “what on earth are you trying to do, poke people into the Yes booth with cattle prods? I have a speech today and you have chopped me off at the knees”

    98. mato21 says:

      Well that didn’t take long for the rowing back to begin according to the news at 10am
      Another kite flying exercise I think and the wind just dropped from under their kite 

    99. Jiggsbro says:

      What is considered acceptable and what is not. Nukes based at Devonport with 11,000 hard working decent people affected NOT ACCEPTABLE. Nukes based on the Clyde with up to 1 million Jocks affected: ACCEPTABLE.
       
      You might like to take a quick look at where Devonport is in relation to Plymouth, then compare that to Faslane and Glasgow. The ‘worst-case’ accident in Devonport would be on the outskirts of a major city and could kill 11,000 people (apparently). A similar accident in Faslane would be 25 miles from a major city and wouldn’t kill millions of civilians. It wouldn’t even kill thousands. Chances are it wouldn’t even kill tens. Faslane – as someone pointed out upthread – is relatively remote. Devonport is contiguous with a city.

    100. Rod Mac says:

      This is lunacy and typical of Westminster arrogance.
      In the very unlikely event of them being this stupid .
      I would suggest that the RUK would need to train lots of sniffer dogs to know the difference between marzipan and Semtex.
      (if the boys at GCHQ do not already have me on a file I bet this does the trick)

    101. Max says:

       
      This story certainly shows up what side Scottish Unionist politicians are on – they are on England’s side. Neither Jim Murphy nor Sir Menzies Campbell have condemned this idea to annex Faslane and Coulport.  Who is to say that any future UK government will not do this anyway if Scots do vote NO?
       
      How many bits of Scotland could end up as sovereign British territory under planned changes to devolution? 

    102. There isn’t really much to say, is there? I can understand this as part of the negotiations after a yes vote, but I can’t for the life of me figure out what’s to be gained for BT by this being made public now.

      Its as if the Tories hearts aren’t really in the ‘No’ fight, isn’t it? 😉

    103. velofello says:

      The big wealthy, powerful USA could annex a piece of England to house Trident and pay all costs of exiting Scotland and building a new facility in this little sovereign(?) piece of the USA in England.The maintenance shop for the nuke heads is already in England so all that is needed is to build a garage for the submarines and a shed for the missiles in this little piece of USA annexed England.
      Now what to call this annexed piece of England, something Bay would be topical and suit the mood?

    104. G. Campbell says:

      The background behind the forthcoming “SALMOND CRASS, SAYS CLEGG” headlines.

      Bloke called Nick asks BBC Radio 4 broadcaster if she’ll let him attack Alex Salmond on LBC Radio.

      Aasmah Mir @AasmahMir – 8 Jul
      I’m on @lbc973 all this week from 1 til 4pm. Today: Sir Andy Murray? Salmond’s Saltire. Saatchi-Lawson. And do you keep your ‘maiden’ name?
      https://twitter.com/AasmahMir/status/354200783505457153

      nick stewart @colonelstewart – 8 Jul
      @AasmahMir @lbc973 if you need someone of scottish lineage to fulminate about the frightful Alex Salmond, I’m your man
      https://twitter.com/colonelstewart/status/354201462420668416

      BBC Radio 4 broadcaster Aasmah Mir (standing in for LBC’s Julia Hartley-Brewer) tells him to phone in.

      Aasmah Mir@AasmahMir – 8 Jul
      @colonelstewart hello! We have our guests sorted but feel free to call in. 0845 60 60 973 x
      https://twitter.com/AasmahMir/status/354203094961229824

      nick stewart @colonelstewart – 8 Jul
      @AasmahMir Most jolly to converse with you briefly earlier . Aplogies for English error! x
      https://twitter.com/colonelstewart/status/354281597186482176

      Bloke called Nick does such a good job of attacking Alex on LBC, bloke called Nick is invited back on to attack Salmond on this week’s Call Clegg.

      nick stewart @colonelstewart – 9 Jul
      30 secs with @AasmahMir on @lbc973 yesterday on Murray/Salmond gets me on Ask Nick Clegg on thursday between 9 and 9-30.Better pad up Nick
      https://twitter.com/colonelstewart/status/354561125536378881

      nick stewart @colonelstewart – 11 Jul
      At 9 approx I shall be asking Nick Clegg some testing questions about Andy Murray and the frightful Alex Salmond, @lbc97.3 pad up Mr Clegg
      https://twitter.com/colonelstewart/status/355117406647091200

      This morning’s Call Clegg arrives. Bloke called Nick asks Deputy PM Nick for his view on Salmond’s Saltire shame.

      Nick Clegg responds: “I thought it was a bit crass really.”

      “This is a great triumph for an amazing individual, Andy Murray, who’s done an extraordinary thing, and everybody wants to celebrate in this as a country, and I think at that moment, when the last thing people are thinking about is politics or the referendum or, you know, which politician is trying to get one over on another, the last think people want to see is someone get up and try and make some slighty sort of crass political point… I thought it was totally… totally jarred with the celebratory moment that we all witnessed on centre court last Sunday.”

      Nick Ferrari: “Quick response from you, Nick the 3rd.”

      Nick Stewart (Bloke called Nick): “You will see on the television coverage that Andy Murray was playing GBR. He was playing for Great Britain. There was no mention of Scotland. It was without doubt one of the crassest things I’ve ever seen.”

      Great work, Nick, Nick and Nick!

      #howthebritmediaworks

    105. Vronsky says:

      “indications are that an independent Scotland would be less likely to act as a client state for the US”

      Unfortunately there is at least one major indication to the contrary: the SG’s refusal to initiate a public enquiry into the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. 
       
      On Faslane, there is the precedent of the Treaty Ports.  US interest in a UK base  for nukes is probably stronger than Westminster’s  – after all, in truth it’s the Yanks who control them.  Don’t think Akrotiri, think Guantanamo.

      I have spoken to senior members of the SNP who believe that the base is an important bargaining counter, and that simply evicting them without a bit of prior horse-trading would be silly.  The ‘sovereign territory’ announcement could be a bit of early positioning for this haggling.

      PS: Can’t remember where I read it, but there are credible reports that Jim Murphy is positioning himself for leadership of the Labour party.  He’s ticking a few of the boxes – pro-US, pro-Israel.

    106. Atypical_Scot says:

      @jiggsbro;
       
      The blast radius of modern nukes is 47 miles. I suppose it depends on the definition of ‘accident’.

    107. scottish_skier says:

      This is a huge indignation storm stirred up masterfully but based on inventing something that isn’t even said in the fucking article.
      Aye. Really clever stuff from the Tories eh!

    108. Turnbull Drier says:

      Doug
      So the only 6 things that matter to Westminster are:
      The Fish
      Trident
      The Oil
      The Water
      The Whisky
      The Electricity…
      Oh, Oh, and the Permanent Seat on the Security Council which would be in jeopardy without Trident

    109. naebd says:

      To be fair Scottish skier, the Tories don’t deserve the credit because they don’t write guardian articles, and secondly the allegation doesn’t even appear in the guardian article. But other than that yeah, “Tories”. 

    110. CalumCarr says:

      Why stop at annexing Faslane and Coulport?   Why not annex all of Scotland?  Or is this tomorrow’s announcement?

    111. G. Campbell says:

      A SOURCE SAID.

      Scottish Daily Mail (Alan Roden):
      A source close to the Prime Minister yesterday said there will be ‘English ministers spreading the word about the Union in English constituencies’. The source conceded that ‘there will always be Little Englanders – the Nigel Farage types’, but stressed: ‘You don’t have to scratch very far beneath the surface [of English people] to find a love for Scotland.’

      Press and Journal (Calum Ross):
      A Downing Street source said Mr Cameron wanted “English ministers spreading the word about the union in English constituencies”. He added: “There will always be ‘little Englanders’ – Nigel Farage types – but you don’t have to scratch far beneath the surface of English people to find a love for Scotland.”

      The Courier (Kieran Andrews)
      A senior Number 10 source told The Courier English ministers would be “very much” actively encouraged to talk up Scotland as part of the union in their constituencies. The insider said: “There will always be Little Englanders – the Nigel Farage types – but you don’t have to scratch very far beneath the surface (of English people) to find a love for Scotland.”

      The Scotsman (David Maddox)
      Sources close to Mr Cameron also said he wants English ministers to start taking the message about keeping the UK together to their constituencies.
      One source said there will be “English ministers spreading the word about the Union in English constituencies. There will always be Little Englanders – the Nigel Farage types – but you don’t have to scratch very far beneath the surface [of English people] to find a love for Scotland.”

      The Herald (Kate Devlin)
      It is understood Mr Cameron also intends to step up his Government’s campaign against independence by ordering his ministers and Tory MPs to make the case for the Union in England.
      [A source] said: “There will always be little Englanders, Nigel Farage types. But you don’t have to scrape far beneath the surface to find a love for Scotland.”

    112. G. Campbell says:

      Hmm. Looks like my previous LBC comment is stuck in the spam trap.

    113. Wullie B says:

       EBC North now saying that this is not happening http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-23267584

    114. HandandShrimp says:

      naebd
       
      Was it not actually a Lib Dem that provoked this (ex Defence Minister Sir Nick Harvey). People like Murphy were questioned and Hammond already has plenty of material out there but as far as I can see it was Harvey that was banging this drum for the Guardian.
      “Tories” goes without saying but in this case it was “Coalition”.

    115. Dcanmore says:

      @Jiggsborough … you’ve completely missed the point, what I’m saying is when the decisions are made in Whitehall the Scottish people are an irrelevance, collateral damage. Gareloch was chosen because it is far enough away from London that’s still practical to access the Altantic, the concern that it maybe near or not near a major city or any of the closer towns (Dunoon, Helensburgh, Greenock, Port Glasgow, Dumbarton, Alexandria) did not matter.

    116. CameronB says:

      @ naebd
      Judging by the guardian’s middle east articles, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Foreign Office didn’t produce what we have all just read, so yeah it’s the Tories. It would have been Labour but they couldn’t hold middle England. Remember, the political parties are merely temporary custodians of Ministerial power bestowed by the Crown. The Foreign Office works for the Crown, not the politicos.

    117. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      I addressed this to a John King post, nae idea which of the 287 this week, at the fag end of a thread.
       
      Wrt Cameron feckin up the Bitter No Together Campaign
      Cameron is undermining the Labour led No campaign
       
      See that in perspective and you begin to see a pattern of undermining Darling and ergo Labour.
       
      Cameron stands to gain if Labour lose their wodge of seats at Westminster.
       
      He will not have a guaranteed majority in Westminster but as near as makes it a lot easier. Then factor in some gerrymandering of English constituency seats and bingo.
       
      All Cameron needs to do is
      a) Ensure Scotland keeps Sterling
      b) Faslane is kept for a defined period (see shit fan scene from The Guardian) until an alternative can be found. (Cumbria)
      c) Some sort of deal can be done to take Scottish Water to supply London
       
      Scotland was only about 4 things to Westminster, Oil, Fish, Trident and Water.
      They have annexed a large slice of the N Sea off Berwick and that wasn’t for fish; think fracked gas (no subsidence on land and potable water pollution) with perhaps recoverable oil in there too?
       
      As for the Fish, I has no traction anymore at Westminster as it was only used to buy off the Spanish. That is to a Free Scotland’s problem to solve.
       
      As a conspiracy theory it is looking more and more plausible. cf Trident invasion threat (how not negotiate rule 1, also known as gunboat diplomacy)
       

    118. Max says:

       
      From the BBC: “A government source told the BBC the idea was “interesting” because of the huge costs of relocating the base.”
       
      From the Guardian: “One defence source said: “It would cost a huge amount of money, running into tens of billions of pounds, to decommission Faslane. Those costs would be factored into any negotiations on an independence settlement. The sovereign base area is an option. It is an interesting idea because the costs of moving out of Faslane are eye-wateringly high.”
       
      From Downing Street: “Not credible or sensible to designate Faslane base as a UK sovereign territory”
       
      It would appear that the UK government are now saying opposite things. 

    119. Sonas says:

      “Positive Case for the Union appearing live today (11th July 2013) for the very first time ever, here ”
       
      http://www.bettertogether.net/blog/entry/watch-alistair-darlings-lecture-live
      Can’t get the thing to stream. Anyone managing to watch Flipper live?

    120. Braco says:

      G. Campbell,
      That’s quality! Thanks

    121. westie7 says:

      BBC Scotland deliberately misleading reporting
       
      Frontpage showing that Trident/Faslane would remain as UK enclave now changed to “No10 Rejects MOD”
       
      No 10 Break the bad news so they can say how good and nice they are when they save us from doom

    122. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Frontpage showing that Trident/Faslane would remain as UK enclave now changed to “No10 Rejects MOD””

      In fairness, that’s a story adapting to breaking news – Downing Street only issued the comments this morning at around 9.30.

    123. Quick the suns oot says:

      This bit: ‘The Ministry of Defence is officially working on only one option for the Faslane base ahead of next year’s Scottish independence referendum – a defeat for the SNP’
      Chilling. the MoD are officially working to defeat the SNP. Good grief! (Ok you can read the above statement two ways but sometimes I wonder if they know the outcome of the referendum already with their access to emails, Internet data etc)

    124. Dal Riata says:

      And they say we’re all better together..LOL!
       
      Doug Daniel has left some cracking posts BTL on that Guardian article, by the way.
       
      The Guardian’s editorial on the subject is straight out of the UKOK Project Fear Scotland Vote No propaganda manual. It really is incredible, condescending guff. A “left-leaning” organisation… Aye, right!

    125. David Smillie says:

      I brought up the possibility that the UK might designate Faslane as a UK sovereign base last year on the Bella Caledonia site.  This was after the sudden announcement that Royal Marines (23 commando) were moving there with immediate effect.  I was barracked as a troll by so-called supporters of Scottish independence.  I hope James Coleman and Galen 7 among others are now paying attention to Realpolitik.

    126. Ellie says:

      The only thing we have ever had to do to achieve independence is let our opponents be themselves.

    127. Titler says:

      At the end of the day (as Salmond has already found out) an independent Scotland would very much remain fully part of NATO and similarly – symbolic-only and pyrrihic NOMINAL “rental payments” aside – Faslane and its nukes WILL remain in rUK hands and control. Call it what you want: real politik, just the way it is… but all this talk of extorting X bazillion pounds a day out of rUK, sinking scrap ships around the base and/or raising a militia etc. is just all so much BS. It’s not going to happen.
       
      Oh hell, I am caught agreeing with Captain Caveman, now I feel dirty. But he’s basically right. Not necessarily that Faslane will remain British, but even in the event of a Yes vote, and the MOD accepting they need to move the nuclear weapons, it’s going to take years to set up an alternative location, and Scotland will be under immense pressure to either just leave it where it is, or contribute to it’s activities in some way… at the very least, allowing Trident equipped submarines to patrol in their independent waters, because otherwise the UK doesn’t really have a deterrent at all. And neither the UK nor the US whose wider interests our deterrent is structured around will accept massive changes to it without putting up an enormous fight.
      This, again, is really why I can never be a Nationalist, it’s a hopelessly outdated view of the world; indeed it has been for quite some time… look at Ireland again and the Treaty Ports. It’s hardly talked about now, and the nationalists in 1921 loathed that Britain retained full rights over them. The UK returned them to Ireland in 1938, but by 1941 Churchill was instructing Montgomery to draw up invasion plans to take them back again by force. However, improved anti-submarine warfare, as well as the Republic leaning quietly towards Britain (secretly allowing British pilots crashing in Ireland to escape, but interning the Germans, as well as building airports for joint use with the Rathduff program in case the UK fell) rendered them less important for the Battle of the Atlantic by late 1942, so the idea simply tailed off… And so it is with Trident. The UK fleet was placed in Scotland for geo-strategic reasons, and although Russian bombers now can easily reach Scotland, the ability to escape under the polar ice or into multiple wide oceans is still vital for Submarines. So the idea that the MOD, under any government, is just going to say “Ok, vote went against us, let’s go somewhere else lads” is just utterly naive. To get them to leave, you’ll have to win the anti-nuclear fight comprehensively. Either apart from Independence, or on top of it, but winning Independence isn’t going to be enough, because as the Guardian article shows, irrational and selfish as you may think it is (and it is in the absence of any pressing military threat at the moment), the MOD is going to fight you on the Nukes. And in that fight, being CND is more important than being SNP.

    128. HandandShrimp says:

      Shame No 10 have moved so quickly to kill this – they must have felt the votes sliding away from 400 miles away. 🙂 Sir Nick may be having a meeting with Clegg sans coffee.

    129. Craig P says:

      Lurker had already said it but the problem with keeping Faslane is the fairly trivial amount of blockading required at the narrow mouth of the Gareloch to render the subs useless. Any sovereign UK territory would have to control the exit to the Gareloch as well otherwise the whole plan is pointless. 

    130. Frazer Allan Whyte says:

      Never underestimate the perfidy of perfidious Albion – this might just be a stalking horse for a grab of another territory ideally suited for submarine bases and with a few other “benefits” besides – the Shetlands. Remember the comments regarding Shetland “separating” just a few months past? If you think this is paranoia take a look at Britsh history of the last century or so from Northern Ireland to Cyprus to  Diego Garcia.
      Apropos the Guardian article – they seem to think that the current location of the abominable base is NOT near a densely populated part of the UK – has Glasgow already been evacuated?

    131. Luigi says:

      Aye, it’s also a pity that certain Labour politicians were not so quick to reject the proposal. Their shame. 

    132. kininvie says:

      Here’s an interesting report (2007) on the problems of Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus The most enlightening bit is the Appendix. Would seem UK govt pays no rent.
       
      http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Doc/XrefViewHTML.asp?FileID=11651&Language=EN
       

    133. HandandShrimp says:

      Luigi
       
      Jim Murphy seems to occupy a different political atmosphere from the rest of us. He seems perfectly poised to carry on the Blair/Bush agenda and has little or no interest in Scotland other than as a launch pad for his career. I’m not convinced that Labour are ready to ditch Milliband in favour of him though.

    134. Robert Bryce says:

      Atypical_Scot says:
       
      @jiggsbro;

       The blast radius of modern nukes is 47 miles. I suppose it depends on the definition of ‘accident’.
       
      The “kill zone” is only around 5 or 6 miles.

      There’s no doubt Glasgow would be affected by high doses of radiation and could be fatal for some but Plymouth would be effectively flattened with a 100% death rate.
       
      All told the people of Helensburgh would be up shit creek!
       
      And that’s only with one 475kt warhead going off. I dread to think what would happen if  they all went off!

    135. Robert Kerr says:

      If they all went off Scotland would be “Dissolved” (again ?)
      Hail Alba

    136. Craig P says:

      Thinking about naval bases in Scotland. Why would we keep Faslane post Indy and post Trident? The main area of interest for a Scottish navy will be the North Sea and North Atlantic, bases in the Forth, Scapa Flow/Shetland and Western Isles would be more usefully placed than Faslane. And if the approaches to the Clyde require policing, surely somewhere like Stranraer is better placed than Faslane?

    137. Frazer Allan Whyte says:

      Fortunately the likelihood of a blast either due to accident or war is highly unlikely – the real danger to Glasgow is from a nuclear accident due to sheer incompetence or institutionalized sloth.Radiation pollution is forever as various other parts of Scotland can witness to as is the current process of turning large parts of Cumbria into a dripping nuclear waste sponge. The nuclear deterrant force is run by a bunch where the captains hit well known reefs and whose alcoholic crews off their officers on occasion.Very “deterring.” Why this abomination is tolerated even under the present regime is beyond me. Any move south to Devon or Milford Haven is not going to happen as potential proximity to nuclear poisons tends to result in a sudden decline in “patriotism.” On a Yes vote it will be either “no nukes” or “grab territory”. Since the former has logic, economic sense and humanity behind it we can pretty well be sure that the second choice will be made.

    138. G. Campbell says:

      And so it begins.

      Salmond’s Centre Court Saltire Stunt ‘Crass’ Says Clegg
      http://www.lbc.co.uk/salmonds-centre-court-saltire-stunt-crass-says-clegg-74862

    139. pa_broon74 says:

      Just reading some of the comments on the Guardian article; oh dear… “Its MOD policy!”
       
      I would have thought in terms of where to put nuclear fire crackers, geography is the most important thing. I imagine Faslane was picked because road transport was good (close to airports, rail heads etc) and its in a valley. If any thing cooked off most of the blast would be absorbed by surrounding hills.
       
      You can’t bandy around megadeath figures without looking at the land, also – from reading – (and again it depends on terrain) more people die from resultant fall out than from the initial blast. If there was an ill wind for example and Glasgow got hit; the death rate would be enormous.
       
      That said I think its a bit moot, as we all know you can fire missiles at nuclear bombs and they won’t go off, I know this because I saw it in True Lies.
       
      😉

    140. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      Clegg’s stunt of appearing to be a Liberal, a Democrat and an humanity loving being is a crass stunt, so says BtP

    141. Ron says:

      I see James Cook tweeting, confirming that BBC were told by MOD source last night that the “sovereign territory” idea was on the table, and contrasting with Downing St denying this morning.
       
      “MoD source to BBC last night: “sovereign base area is an option…an interesting idea.” Downing Street today: idea “not credible”.”
      Interesting.

    142. Luigi says:

      If one of the bigt Ts went off, Glasgow would indeed be sheltered from the intial blast, althought the fallout would render the city uninhabitable anyway.
       
      Which would be worse: Instant vapourization or long-term, incurable radiation sickness?
       
      The again, we could always vote yes next year….

    143. Atypical_Scot says:

      @Bugger (the Panda);
       
      How could a foreign government retain Scottish water as privatised in iScotland? Surely Holyrood could turn that over, and the sea off Berwick. The only any of that stuff will stick is through force, and that ain’t gonna happen.

    144. Braco says:

      Titler,
      ‘the MOD is going to fight you on the Nukes. And in that fight, being CND is more important than being SNP.’
       
      Oh yes it’s CND that have brought Scotland to the verge of a Democratic YES/NO decision by the Scottish electorate on re establishing our sovereignty is it?
       
      Because that is the only thing that is threatening the British Establishment’s pre ordained decision to deploy (and then renew) their Nukes in a Country that has repeatedly, through all democratic representation available to it in the last 30 years, comprehensively rejected them.
       
      When did CND ever really put the shits up the establishment like this? CND are the establishment (or become it) just write a list of Cabinet ministers and backbenchers who signed the pledge and wore the badge! Usually you write some interesting stuff, intelligent and thoughtful though I mostly disagree with it, but this last effort is just daft! 
       
      This is not against CND by the way, which is full of committed activists. It’s just that I find the idea that CND could ever convince the UK establishment, those with the power to act, to abandon it’s nuclear virility symbol and ticket to the (as they see them) ‘tables of Power’ to be simply laughable.  

    145. Dcanmore says:

      @Craig P …
      As much as I like the idea of Stranraer Harbour to be put back into use, the old breakers yard (WW2 no.2 port) at Cairnryan would be more suitable for warships. At the opposite side of Loch Ryan is the former Sunderland flying boat base at Wig Bay, which is virtually untouched and could be easily redeveloped into a Coastguard station with a couple helicopters and maybe even a modern SAR flying boat, that would serve the North Channel and the entire south coast of Scotland with RAE West Freugh retained as an airforce training base.
       
      http://www.airfieldinformationexchange.org/community/showthread.php?2712-Wig-Bay
       
      http://djwilkes.smugmug.com/Military/RN-Dockyards-Murmansk-and/5008418_HfMbDn/305865197_BcXTDKC#!i=305865197&k=BcXTDKC

    146. HandandShrimp says:

      Faslane has the accommodation, equipment and facilities to perform as the primary naval base and Scottish Naval HQ. The actual patrol duties would be undertaken by boats that are out for weeks at a time. Re-supplying for boats in the North Sea could easily be undertaken from Crombie or Rosyth or indeed Lyness up in Hoy although the later would need a dust and a coat of paint. One has to remember that Scotland and Northern Ireland is currently served only by Faslane. We would not be reducing the cover – in fact there would be slightly less area to cover.  

    147. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      Only after a NO vote, it would be privatised and water would be shipped to London. It just takes a few super tankers on a shuttle run and then a feed into canal system in the north of England. That is what they do in the US from Canada, albeit via specially constructed canals to California and some inland states.

      Boris Johnson has been gumming this for some time.

    148. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      Ah I see you point Atype
       
      I meant that in a No vote it would be privatised and then sucked dry to England and if a Yes he would seek access for London to it on a commercial basis.
       
      i did another post somewher about the effect of a No a vote and say the Scottish Water would be privatised on days 1, 2 or 3. etc.
       
      Sorry for the confusion.
       

    149. Angus McPhee says:

      Brilliant, if I bought your house and kindly said you could leave your car, sofa and tools in the garage till you got your new garage sorted out, I’d not be expecting to pay your removal costs as well.

    150. lumilumi says:

      Robert Louis @7.13
      Does this nonsense not betray to the whole world, the exact nature of the bullying colonial mindset towards Scotland, that is so pervasive in Westmidden.  Imagine, If Russia today announced that it would like to base its subs in Finland (a country which it has invaded on at least three occasions), and declare the port of Helsinki a ‘Russian sovereign enclave’. 
       
      The USSR already did it in 1944-1956! Well, not quite port of Helsinki but about 30 km away in Porkkala. The terms of the Finnish-USSR armistice in 1944 dictated that Finland had to lease a naval base to the USSR in Porkkala. All the local people were evacuated from the area (nearly 400 km2) and it was a closed USSR base for 11,5 years.
       
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porkkala
       
      The south coast mainline ran through the USSR area and this created the longest railway tunnel in Finland, I think nearly 40 km. The trains ran above ground, of course, but the windows were shuttered and Soviet soldiers boarded the carriages and stood guard, immobile and silent. Apparently the train trip (Helsinki-Turku) was very popular among western tourists! 😀
       
      When local people were allowed to return in 1956, they found their farms, houses, everything in a state of neglect and disrepair, even cementeries had been vandalised.
       
      I can’t get the link to work, but type “Kirkkonummi” into Google maps and zoom out until you see two peninsulas jutting into the sea in a southwesterly direction. They’re Porkkalanniemi and Upinniemi. The Soviet area was approximately from Degerby in the west to the inlet between Kirkkonummi and Espoo in the east.

    151. Andy-B says:

      So Faslane could become Scotlands Guantanamo Bay…for Trident Subs
       
       
      Would we even consider letting this happen..surely its unthinkable.

    152. Jiggsbro says:

       The blast radius of modern nukes is 47 miles. I suppose it depends on the definition of ‘accident’.
       
      I’m assuming their definition of accident doesn’t include accidental detonation of a nuclear weapon. I’d imagine – hope – that safety systems are such that it simply isn’t possible to accidentally detonate one and that the worst accident would be a radiation leak. And that blast radius is perhaps for very large ICBMs, not the 100 kiloton W76 which I believe the Trident carries. This handy app allows you to superimpose a blast radius on Google maps. It defaults to 100 kt, so you can easily compare Faslane and Devonport. http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/gmap/hydesim.html

    153. Captain Caveman says:

      “Oh hell, I am caught agreeing with Captain Caveman, now I feel dirty. But he’s basically right.”
       
      😀
       
      O/T
      Wow. Just wow, man. I’d always assumed you to be a will o’ the wisp; some kind of forum pretend-boogey man; stories to scare ‘noobs’ about being good and not to deploy ‘txt speak’ etc. Shit, I don’t care that you’ve been rude at all; your considerable, towering reputation precedes you, most especially on that front, and thus that’s only to be expected. Obviously.
       
      Awesome, that’s made my day. 😀

    154. Andy-B says:

      @shinty
       
      Good wee snippet on faslane thanks for posting…..
       
       
      It beggars belief that SEPA, cant take any action against all the radiation leaks into the Loch, on the sole basis that Faslane is a military base, SEPA did state on that snippet that if Faslane was a civilian base it would close it down.
       
      That comment alone shows just how serious the leaks of radio-active material have been, over the years.

    155. Vambomarbeleye says:

      Of topic. Why is it called the RUK. Surly the FUK would be better and more acurate.

    156. M4rkyboy says:

      The Westminster plan is to partition itself so that the UK can continue.This means that Westminster will decide on what constitutes Scottish territory.The final insult would be the use of a common law instrument-a partition in kind-to create a new Scotland.
      Essentially the Treaty is not worth the paper its written on in the face of Westminster absolute sovereignty.

    157. Thomas Cochrane says:

      Sink an old ship at the Rhu narrows and nothing will get in or out of the Gareloch…

    158. G H Graham says:

      Welcome to Mactanamo Bay, Scotland.
       

    159. westie7 says:

      If you really want a cure for Brachycardia then listen to Jeremy Vines love in this lunchtime with some cracking comments from Der Engerland callers

    160. kininvie says:

      So now that this two day wonder of a scare story is about to disappear into the undergrowth, it’s worth asking how it ever emerged.
       
      The answer lies in the MoD, which is not only bloated, incompetent and negligent, but is also almost impossible to get under control, as successive defence secretaries have found. Because it is semi-populated with military types on secondment, and because it is so huge and immune to sensible management, it’s hardly surprising that a story which suits its political agenda leaks, without apparently any senior politician being aware.
       
      I put the source of the story down to one or more of the military, who may be great generals or admirals (though I wonder), but have the political sensitivity of a flea. It’s probably mildly unfair to castigate our politicians for sticking with Trident: I bet they all secretly long to be rid of it. No, the people who would feel the loss directly and deeply are the military (and not just the navy), to whom the prestige of being a nuclear power, and the privilege of swapping nuclear gossip over cocktails with their US contacts convinces them that without Trident they would shrivel down to the same level as ….Denmark?  Worse still, the French would still have the things, while they didn’t, and the French would no doubt enjoy reminding them of the fact…
       
      I doubt we’ve heard the last of this. Since about 1950, acre upon acre of trees have been felled to fuel MoD briefings to ministers about how really, really essential the nuclear deterrent is. They are getting a bit desperate – remember Cameron at Faslane saying how we had to deter North Korea? That wasn’t his bright idea – he will have been briefed – even he may have realised that what he was spouting was nonsense.
       
      I’ve no idea what the MoD will come up with next. But right up to September 2014 and beyond, you will find them fighting tooth and nail to convince their masters that it is absolutely essential to retain Trident and Faslane, by whatever means. Frankly, I think their masters will eventually stop listening – and the need for No 10 to waste energy squashing yesterday’s story will not have endeared them any more to the MoD than they were already (i.e not much)
       
      As for Uncle Sam – he won’t give a shit. Mild regret at losing a nice source of revenue. Deeper regret, because some of our weapons research me be useful to him. But the idea that the US is in some way turning the thumbscrews on the UK over nuclear issues is baloney… You need to look closer to home.

    161. Frazer Allan Whyte says:

      B the Panda errs when he says Canada exports water to the USA – while practically everything else is for sale that is one thing that is not. He may have seen NAWAPA proposals which plan to turn large parts of the Canadian Rockies into reservoirs to hold water to ship to the arid west and south of the USA but fortunately, short of outright military conquest, that is not going to happen. On the other hand recent floods and downpours aside there is a shortage of water, power, second home sites, hunting estates, nuclear sites and nuclear waste sites in the southern UK – and Scotland fits the bill nicely.”No” means no good thing will come Scotland’s way.

    162. Ellie says:

      I couldn’t quite believe what I was seeing when I clicked on this, but somehow in the context of today’s rancid outpourings
       
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2013/jul/11/trident-base-no-10-mod-sovereign-scottish
       
      Quite a banner day for the guardian and now they end it with this.  I think this should be sent to every Better Together follower and show them exactly what their ‘partners’ think of them

    163. CameronB says:

      @ Ellie
      Kind of supports what I suggested earlier, that it is the Crown and the various Ministries pulling the strings, not the political parties. That is the British state, not its’ lackeys.

    164. john king says:

      “So the only 6 things that matter to Westminster are:

      The FishTridentThe OilThe WaterThe WhiskyThe Electricity…Oh, Oh, and the Permanent Seat on the Security Council which would be in jeopardy without Trident”
       
      Oh and a fanatical devotion to the pope. 
      seven  things
      fear,
      surprise, ……………………………………..

        

    165. john king says:

      bugger the panda says

      Clegg’s stunt of appearing to be a Liberal, a Democrat and an humanity loving being is a crass stunt, so says BtP

        Please keep it in context bugger, his crass stunt cant in any way be compared to the  crass stunt of a FM pulling a saltire out at Wimbledon which is, lets be honest a disgrace to Scotland and the UK.
       lets get some clarity here
      he could have had someones eye out with that
      the way he whipped it out I mean,
      ahem

    166. john king says:

      “Brilliant, if I bought your house and kindly said you could leave your car, sofa and tools in the garage till you got your new garage sorted out, I’d not be expecting to pay your removal costs as well.”
      I agree Angus why the hell should we pay them to get their toys the hell  out of our country.
        

    167. Shinty says:

      I’m am pretty fed up with this attitude that we have to pay for their removal – the Scottish people never wanted them on her soil from Polaris up to the present Trident, neither did we want our country to be used as a dumpster but we got that too. Union dividend indeed.
      They have had plenty time to prepare for their removal, but they refuse to even contemplate a Yes vote – tough, it’s coming, get used to it.
       
       I watched Hammond at the HOC defence committee recently, his attitude (and others) prove beyond a shadow of doubt that we are definitely NOT better together.

    168. Captain Caveman says:

      Going back to my original point and the underlying fundamentals here, I basically question what actually can be achieved via the ballot box? The (IMO rather quaint) presumption around here seems to be “pretty much everything”, but just how much true sovereignty do you think a small country, part of the EU and wider world community of much larger players, actually has?
       
      Titler talks about CND. He seems to honestly believe that there’s even a snowball’s chance that such a movement could actually rid the UK of nuclear weapons…? The women of Greenham Common chained themselves to fences for decades; CND in the 70s and 80s was a vastly larger and more influential movement than it is now. However, did it so much as prevent one Polaris missile from being delivered and used? No. (Don’t get me wrong here, as a passionate ‘anti nuclear’ I would love his basic premise and hope to be correct, but it manifestly and demonstrably isn’t)
       
      Two million people took to the streets on the eve of the (disastrous) Iraq War; absolutely unprecedented in British terms. Did this stop a single cruise missile from being launched, or one less pair of army boots on the ground? Of course it didn’t.
       
      My point is that, when you progress beyond the realms of idealistic sixth form common room politics and get out there in the real world for a few decades, you come to realise that “sovereignty” even of the UK – the seventh richest nation in the world after all – is both limited and relative. It remains answerable to all manner of unelected third party influences, ranging from larger, more powerful countries such as the US; the EU of which it forms a subservient component; the markets; large corporations; even wealthy individuals. So then, the question becomes, just how much true self determination and influence would an independent Scotland honestly have? It is already dawning on the Scottish people just what this “independence” would actually comprise – a Scotland wedded to the Pound, the BoE, NATO, the EU (well, possibly, and in a much diminished role), and that’s assuming there are no further ‘downgrades’ which have to be dragged out of the SNP between now and the poll itself.
       
      If all this sounds very negative and cynical, well, that’s because it precisely is. Like I say, if you’re asking me how I would like things to be, I’d very much support the self determination of peoples all around the world, including Scotland. But the world isn’t egalitarian; it is not a fair place. That’s just not how things work.

    169. kininvie says:

      @ C Caveman
      Morning, Captain.
      Much of what you say may, or may not, be true. But is a fact that a nation state is defined by its recognised posession of territorial sovereignty, and without sovereignty, you ain’t a state.
      In practical terms that sovereignty may be limited by all sorts of factors, as you say. But the heart of the matter is that, with sovereignty, you at least have some degree of choice. Without it, you have none. The whole independence debate revolves around that simple statement

    170. Shinty says:

      Captain Caveman
      you come to realise that “sovereignty” even of the UK – the seventh richest nation in the world after all
      Sorry that’s incorrect – the UK is very much further down the list 22 to 24 I think.
      Polaris/trident etc have been imposed on Scotland against her wishes, that is how undemocratic and unequal this ‘Union’ is. Do you honestly think they would have imposed this on the people of England if the Thames had been a more suitable location.?
      Scotland under the Union has NO say (Westminster rules) –

    171. Dorothy Devine says:

      “All we need is for Al Qaeda to announce they are setting up a local terrorist branch in Garelochhead to complete the double. ”
       
      Think that one has been done but in Gartocharn no Garelochhead.
      There was much fussing and suggestion by the BBBC about a big bang in the forest – oooh! they said its terrorist activity , we are all in danger , hide under your beds!
      And then it went as  silent as the grave . No terrorists just local punter playing about .
      At no point did the BBBBC tell anyone it was now safe to come out from under the bed.

    172. scottish_skier says:

      CC: If all this sounds very negative and cynical, well, that’s because it precisely is. Like I say, if you’re asking me how I would like things to be, I’d very much support the self determination of peoples all around the world, including Scotland. But the world isn’t egalitarian; it is not a fair place. That’s just not how things work.

      Bit of a quitter huh? Get yourself some backbone man!

      You might not succeed in the end, but at least you can die trying.

    173. Captain Caveman says:

      I know what you’re saying; maybe I’m just a jaded, cynical old bastard who has lost his political mojo. Me? I like to think I’m being practical, pragmatic and an empiricist, but I guess others will be the judge of that…

    174. scottish_skier says:

      CC. The moment people give up trying to make the world a little better is the moment it all really goes to shit.

    175. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Two million people took to the streets on the eve of the (disastrous) Iraq War; absolutely unprecedented in British terms. Did this stop a single cruise missile from being launched, or one less pair of army boots on the ground? Of course it didn’t.”

      On the other hand, smaller but rowdier protests got the poll tax abandoned. Lesson? The Iraq protests weren’t violent enough. It’s all very nice being peaceful, but if you want results, smash the place up a bit. It’s the ONLY thing that actually scares governments.

    176. Iain says:

      @Rev Stu
      ‘It’s all very nice being peaceful, but if you want results, smash the place up a bit. It’s the ONLY thing that actually scares governments.’
       
      The black choppers will be overhead, or at the very least a Unionist ‘Cybernats are violent, Fascist, Marxist, anarchists’ meme will be once again pursued.
      Still, as my auld granny used to say, it’s never too late to smash the state.

    177. CameronB says:

      The only crimes punishable by death, under the EU constitution, are riots and sedition.

    178. Adrian B says:

      OLD NEWS FROM DECEMBER 2012
      Nuclear Subs to be based at Devonport following Indy vote ?
      However, the Scottish Sunday Express has learned that HM Naval Base Devonport, in Plymouth, Devon, already has the capacity to house up to 10 nuclear submarines, compared to seven at Faslane.
      In?addition,?Coalition?defence minister Philip Dunne has admitted that a large programme of work has taken place to further improve the facilities.
      Military analysts and local politicians already believe that Devonport is the secret fall-back option should the SNP convince Scots to vote for independence in 2014.
      http://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/363431/Plan-B-will-take-nuclear-subs-to-Devon

    179. Captain Caveman says:

      “On the other hand, smaller but rowdier protests got the poll tax abandoned. Lesson? The Iraq protests weren’t violent enough. It’s all very nice being peaceful, but if you want results, smash the place up a bit. It’s the ONLY thing that actually scares governments.”
       
      That might be an empirical truth – but there’s a very important caveat in there. In the case of the Poll Tax, opposition to it was universal and an absolute no-brainer. I’m a lifelong Tory as you know, and even people of my political persuasion were incredulous and aghast in equal measure.
       
      So basically, it’s one thing violently opposing and demonstrating against something that pretty much everyone opposes – but quite another matter when there is a significant body of people who disagree with you. Your violent protests and “smashing the place up a bit” can get you into a deeply entrenched “Northern Ireland situation” where, ironically enough, the only available solution is a peaceful, democratic one, precisely not violent demonstration…



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top