The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Folding your aces

Posted on July 08, 2018 by

Alert readers may recall that a few weeks ago we revealed how an independent Scotland could reduce its budget deficit by billions of pounds a year – by renting out the Faslane naval base to the rest of the UK to keep their nuclear weapons in.

Voters in England, we learned, were more than happy to pay Scotland £5bn annually – and perhaps even more – for a Trident submarine park during the decades that it would take to build a replacement base south of the border.

Of course, that plan is only any good if the people of Scotland would accept it too.

And fortunately, by a large margin it turns out that they would.

Because while the left would have you believe that Scots are implacably opposed to Trident on moral grounds, that simply isn’t the case. Only 20% of Scots – and only a third of Yes voters – would demand the near-immediate removal of Trident on independence, with the remaining 80% happy to let the submarines remain in place subject only to haggling over the price.

But that’s not the only surprising outcome. Because while No voters claim to be the hard-headed economic pragmatists who don’t want independence because of what they claim it would cost, almost half of them are idiots who would willingly give up a multi-billion-pound bargaining chip for peanuts and shiny bracelets, by letting the rUK have Faslane for nothing or a small token rent.

Still, an equal number of No voters to those who are willing to give it away – 45%would demand £5bn or more a year in rent for the base, only fractionally fewer than the 47% of Yes voters who would want the same. Compressing the poll options to three gives the result:

Rent out Faslane for at least £5bn a year: 47%
Rent it out for free or cheaply: 33%
Refuse to rent it and demand removal: 20%

And the party breakdowns were fascinating too:

The Tories – obviously – were mad keen on handing bits of Scotland to Westminster for free, but weirdly it was Lib Dem voters who most wanted to extract a good price for Faslane, with a whopping 63% of them wanting £5bn or more for the base, far higher than the identical figures of 48% for SNP and Labour supporters.

We’ll be honest, folks, we’re having a lot of trouble understanding the people who want Scotland to be independent, but also want to keep Trident, but would turn their noses up at being paid £5bn a year for it. We try really hard on this website not to ever call voters (rather than politicians) stupid, but that one’s testing our limits. There’s at least some ideological sense to Unionists being willing to hand Faslane over for beans, but Yes/SNP voters?

What it does demonstrate, however, is that the feelings of the electorate are a lot more complex and nuanced than either side tends to admit (whether we’re talking sides of the constitutional debate or the nuclear debate). And that’s something that’s always worth keeping in mind.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 08 07 18 12:56

      Folding your aces | speymouth

    269 to “Folding your aces”

    1. mike cassidy says:

      And in the first general election after Scotland becomes independent –

      the various parties can include their trident proposals in their manifestos.

      Decision made in Scotland by the people of Scotland.

    2. Grouse Beater says:

      Similar to Greenlander’s Thule American Air Force base. Worth having their self governance from Denmark while keeping the base on a five year renewable basis for a wad of cash.

    3. louis.b.argyll says:

      Nuanced it is.

      Makes setting the agenda essential for the UK government.

      See Novochocks, Chequers, Royal engagements, BBC news, Gordon Brewer (straight to SNPBAD this morn), the FREE TV plugs for printed far right pamphlets disguised as newspapers.

    4. schrodingers cat says:

      alternatively, once independent, if after 3 weeks it is still there we could stick trident on ebay?

    5. jimnarlene says:

      It’d make sense to extract as much cash, as possible, while a new base is being built.
      My preference, however, is to get rid ASAP.

    6. Street Andrew says:

      Well, I’d say sting the buggers for as much as possible. think in this day and age £5 billion for garaging is modest compared with, for example parking a car in central London.

      Trident is now obsolete anyway. It’s only possible value to the UK is to use it as a bargaining chip in a bilateral or multi lateral disarmament deal before the word gets out that it is compromised now beyond utility and becomes financially, aswell as militarily useless.

      failing that they could paint them white and weld trunks, tusks and flappy ears onto them.

    7. David McFeeters says:

      It’s acceptable with a solid timescale for removal. But with far heavier emissions checks! Seem to remember the admiralty seeking allowances to allow more crap to be flushed from the Base a while back!

    8. Street Andrew says:

      schrodingers cat says:

      “….alternatively…… we could stick trident on ebay?”

      Sell the buggers to Kim. It would make a fairer game of the US/N Korea negotiations.

    9. Macart says:

      I detest even the concept of the things and nothing would make me happier than seeing the back of them on day one, but the situation is what it is. They wouldn’t be leaving overnight regardless.

      If it takes x amount of time to build a new home for them and the neighbours want to to keep them (for whatever mad reason)? Then I’d rather we made something out of the deal than not. It is a helluva bargaining asset in any negotiation to be sure. If soonest possible is the upshot, then let’s make sure there is a bill (a big one) and that the monies in the meantime work for us.

      Also? I kinda like the Karma of having Westminster actually pay for the consequences of their actions for a change.

    10. Hamish100 says:

      Floating (on occasions) nuclear reactors sailing down the Firth of Clyde and then deliberately sinking them. What could possibly go wrong! In addition they carry warheads that will kill millions and to what end? Freedom to die of radiation poison or incinerated.

      An independent Scotland does not need nuclear weapons. A strong conventional military including navy / us style coast guard will employ Scots in Scotland. Most of the nuke submariners head south when on shore leave.

    11. Bill says:

      Post independence without Trident won’t change anything regarding being a target.

      Scotland would remain a target for Russian or Chinese for that matter. All ports with ship repair facilities both civilian and Navy. All major infrastructures like bridges etc, the NATO fuel deposits with tonnes of aviation fuel.

      Rent it out till rUK have a built new Faslane / Coulport bases, which is about 25-30 years. We’d still be a target for that length of time with or without Trident.

      Can we have a grown up debate about this now?

    12. galamcennalath says:

      Stu say

      Tories – obviously – were mad keen on handing bits of Scotland to Westminster for free

      Those will be the hardcore BritNat ones who even after Indy will continue to see themselves at ‘British’. Their navy will the the Royal Navy, and Faslane will be their overseas base. Older ones may never really accept independence.

      Oddly 17% of SNP voters would effectively give away the base. More and more I think some voters aren’t doing joined up politics – they fail to see the interrationships and connections between things. The reason for that IMO is the dreadful media coverage of Scottish politics. We only have a partially informed electorate.

    13. Dr Jim says:

      You can’t get rid of it overnight so it makes sense to charge an exorbitant amount of cash for it’s existence until you can get rid of it (time limited we all know what the Brits are like)

    14. tartanfever says:

      So Scotland becomes independent , yet in an increasingly violent world of politics and international relations, decides to act as a shield for the rUK by keeping the target firmly on it’s own back.

      England decides to go to war with ”x’, and who gets bombed ? Scotland.

      Remember, we currently have a defence minister who openly says that because of military cutbacks, the UK may have to consider using nukes to attack an enemy. It is widely regarded now that the UK nuclear force is not solely a deterrent, it is to be consider for first strike options.

      You can mention all the money in the world, it would be incredibly stupid to agree to this.

    15. donnywho says:

      Re Holding all the Aces,the idea that England would embargo Scottish goods and services if we snubbed them by becoming independent.

      Firstly it would be very petulant and in the end we could find other markets.

      But if we were to be “embargoed” then we could easily turn off the taps, we literally export the lifeblood of their county, Oil, Electricity and Water. Now i am sure they could find alternative sources but in the meantime they would have to sit in the dark traveling nowhere whilst having a shower once a month.

      We hold quite a few cards i think!

    16. cearc says:

      I think that the question is a bit flawed, in that one year for removal is probably impractical.

      I would suggest a five year lease for the removal and a whop of money.

      Also, and most crucially, oversight by UN inspectors over the whole period.

    17. tartanfever says:

      Another thought. Given the UK’s deplorable record of maintenance, safety and security, would you trust the rUK to uphold or improve shoddy practices on site ?

    18. galamcennalath says:

      It’s probably worth pointing out the complexity of the actual naval presence.

      There are two bases, Faslane and Coulport.

      Faslane is the operational base for the Trident fleet. Coulport is the WMD storage facility.

      Just guessing, but I suspect the functions of Faslane could readily be carried out at other UK RN bases. However, the bunkers at Coulport will be the expensive installation which will take a decade to replicate elsewhere. These bunkers and the presence of the entire UK WMD collection is most contentious.

      There may be an international law issue. Would it be legal or rUK to keep its entire arsenal on a leased foreign territory?

      It might be worth considering leasing one but not the other. The WMDs could go the the US Trident base at Kings Bay, Georgia. Faslane could continue as the operational base.

    19. Welsh Sion says:

      Off topic but by request and with Admin’s permission.

      Here’s the first part of my story about Andrea and Georgia. (Please pay specific attention to the proper nouns in this piece). If there’s sufficient interest, I’ll supply the next part later.


      45. (of 60.)

      Andrea and Georgia

      Andrea and Georgia were two of the most competitive mothers in town. They were as often as not to be seen arguing with each other over some matter or other in the street. Most of the other inhabitants of the town on such occasions would roll their eyes or sigh deeply and mutter to each other that “those two are at it again.”

      Now as befits any such competitive mothers, this was reflected in their offspring, in this case their daughters who attended the local secondary school. Georgia’s eldest, Elizabeth, had latterly just completed her role as the latest Head Girl and had subsequently gone on to University. There was therefore a vacancy for the position of Head Girl at the school. Naturally, Georgia and Andrea were at each other’s throats as to who the new Head Girl should be. (The quiet, demure Gwennie might well have proved a good compromise candidate but, in reality, her passivity, would have played against her. In any case, neither Georgia nor Andrea would have taken her candidature seriously. Gwennie herself was too much in thrall of Georgia in any case to even suggest putting her name forward in the first place.)

      Then inspiration came from another source. Andrea’s daughter, Jamie, put her own name forward, independently of her mother. She proposed that she should be Head Girl, but on condition that she would obtain extra tuition and help with her homework from Georgia who taught at the school. Jamie was rather tired of her mother and Georgia bickering all the time and thought this might be a way of calming both mothers down.

      Georgia and Andrea reluctantly agreed and initially, the agreement seemed to work well. Jamie was duly appointed Head Girl. Georgia revelled in the idea of being Personal Tutor to her. Andrea basked in the glory of her daughter’s academic and social progress, although she was now paying her old foe for her daughter’s lessons. Jamie herself began seeing a boy called Jack Union.

      Then Jamie too moved up to University. The school management soon realised that the arrangement whereby the Head Girl was appointed had worked successfully in Jamie’s case, decided to follow the same procedure for the subsequent one. A peace of sorts had broken out between Georgia and Andrea, and the school were keen that this should be maintained. So they made Andrea’s second daughter, Charlotte, Head Girl. Charlotte would also have Georgia as her personal tutor, this ensuring that the other mother was not snubbed. Andrea gritted her teeth, but was sufficiently placated that Charlotte was maintaining the family honour as Head Girl and consented to the idea. Georgia too, despite not having a family member as Head Girl, saw the financial advantages to herself in being Charlotte’s personal tutor.

      However, one day, a shocking event occurred. A strapping lass at the school, Olive by name, physically attacked Charlotte in the school playground. Charlotte’s injuries were so serious that she was rushed to hospital where she later died. This news in itself was shocking enough and initially everyone was at a loss as to what to do. All except Olive of course.

      Olive saw the opportunity that now presented itself to her. She had probably been planning this for some time, and waiting her time to attack. Olive’s father was a senior Governor at the school, and after a timely period of grief at the events in the playground, he had strong-armed his fellow Governors into accepting Olive as the new Head Girl. (He convincingly persuaded them that Charlotte had actually provoked his daughter and that Olive had in fact only acted in self-defence. Be that as it may, Olive was duly appointed Head Girl. Her period in that position can at best be called “puritanical.” The school Christmas Disco was cancelled as were 18th birthday parties for students, previously organised by the students themselves. Olive decreed a new form of school uniform be worn by everyone; one which was a sombre black from head to toe.

      It was with great joy then when Olive moved on to University and Charlene replaced her as Head Girl. Bright colours came back in and the Christmas Disco restored. Now, although Charlene was a gifted student and she attempted to restore reconciliation between Andrea and Georgia, in reality, she did little more than acknowledge their respective positions, in much the same way her predecessors, Jamie and Charlotte had done. Olive’s reign as Head Girl had been a “blip” and it was thought that a return to the status quo ante was deemed to be the best policy. Charlene however, was not averse to playing Georgia and Andrea against each other as the need arose, but stopped short of abusing either of them directly.

      It was only when Anna became Head Girl some years later that there was a significant sea change. Anna was cunning and a master tactician. She was fed up with the low-key sniping that continued between Georgia and Andrea, despite the work carried out since Jamie’s time as Head Girl. So Anna contrived of a plan: Georgia and Andrea would enter into a civil partnership with each other – ostensibly as equals – whereby she (Anna) would receive love and respect from them both. Likewise, Andrea and Georgia would be bound by their signatures on the piece of paper that bound them to that civil partnership and make a success of their union. Anna considered this to be a win-win situation as far as she was concerned, and that it would put a definitive end to the friction between Andrea and Georgia, once and for all.

      And so, and with some cajoling, bullying and influencing (some would say bribery), Andrea and Georgia’s families were both persuaded to give assent to the civil partnership. The couple themselves, in an attempt to bury the hatchet, smiled for the cameras and declared their undying love for each other.

      [To be continued …]

    20. dandydons1903 says:

      Not worth the risk get rid asap on independence day or just after.

    21. Les Wilson says:

      Give them 2 years at a top rate. That would be it from me, reluctantly. I would rather the warheads were removed within 6 months, that is do able according to what I have read.
      Removing the missiles take longer, but 2 years would do it perhaps sooner.

      We have to bear in mind this is a dangerous world, while the subs and warheads and missiles are operational WE are at risk of a first strike. WE are the ones who will be destroyed not initially Westminster / London. Get a grip Scots and tell them to GTF as soon as possible. 5 years is a long time in the present world, too long for us.

      If the oil price continues at current rate or above, we will have plenty money. Why pander to them when it is Scotland that is a stake. Bought and sold for English gold is a step to far, when our whole country faces Armageddon.

    22. Ken500 says:

      Trident is going with Brexit. Trident is going in any case. An affront to democracy. No matter what McCluskey says. Greenham Common, Berkshire – closed down as a nuclear base 1992. Continued protests in Scotland. Westminster are sanctioning and starving people in the UK. Killing people. To spend on nuclear to spread waste around the world. If they want them they can pay for them in their own backyard. ‘Britain a small island without Empire’ – the Chinese.

      Original dumped in Scotland illegally and secretly by McMillian. (Wanted Fort William) The American did not want the base there. Persuaded by McMillian. The US can no longer afford them.

    23. steff says:

      The mind boggles why anyone would want to have these weapons, It really does. It’s akin to you being happy to have your family member drug lord squatting in your house with the same gun as the other drug lords in the street.

      One Independence day 1 get them the hell out of my country.

    24. Ken500 says:

      Removed within 3 years. Cost £27Billion.(Hammond) Less than is spent on them. Then changed his tune and had no idea. Wanted Scotland to pay for it. They were dumped on Scotland secretly and illegally by the Tories. The waste is dumped in Scotland or flown around the world. Corbyn supports them. Total hypocrite funded by McCluskey. For jobs in Barrow on Furness, They could build something else with the money saved. Or support essential services. Stop starving people. They are killing 120,000+ people a year in the UK. Killing and maiming millions around the world. Psycho bastards. What planet are they on? McCluskey financed that carnage.

    25. Les Wilson says:

      Adding to last post we should also insist via an International court that rUK clean up all their radioactive mess after the base is cleared of weapons. Other radioactive spots that they are responsible for to be cleared over the next 5 years.

      Only on a signed legal agreement that this is agreed, should we allow a remain time be allowed at all.

      Signed by our First Minister, PM of rUK, the United Nations, the US President, the Pope, God.
      Otherwise expect trickery and no clean up to be done.

    26. Ken500 says:

      The subs pick up the missiles in Florida. Fire squint.

    27. Ken500 says:

      There is no way £5Billion would be paid for a lease. Pollsters? Questions. Manipulating the result.

    28. galamcennalath says:

      Ken500 says:

      Trident is going with Brexit. Trident is going in any case.

      Indeed. A burnt out isolated wee backwater like rUK just won’t be in the top league any longer. it would be stupid of them to massively reduce already diminished public services to embark on a costly replacement.

      However… ‘stupid is as stupid does’ !

    29. Rick H Johnston says:

      Except of course the Brit establishment might feel 5 billion a year to have their nuclear toys in Scotland on a permanent basis a good deal.
      The nukes have to go. Unless they are building a replacement facility in rUK we don’t do the deal.

    30. Macart says:


      “There may be an international law issue. Would it be legal or rUK to keep its entire arsenal on a leased foreign territory?”

      Yes and yes. International treaty on nonproliferation;

      Which is basically where the second yes comes in and why rental and fixed time scales would become necessary.

      The base and facility would of necessity still be rUK responsibility for the term of any lease and the lease would be agreed between nation states (permission sought and given).

      Scotland as a new nation state would not be allowed to become (nor would seek to be) a nuclear power, but can allow a nuclear power to lease for a specific period of time.

    31. Liz g says:

      Bill @ 12.38
      Yes let’s
      That Base would be denied to Scotland’s Navy while the British are in it,we would have to find and set up another Base.
      So….. are we to have a 2nd class location?
      And….. That would put quite a dent in any rent for Faslane!
      If the Scottish People want to have their Constitution forbid WMDs why should the needs and wants of another Country impact that?

      There’s also a big difference between letting them park their subs for a while and having warheads on those subs…… especially by allowing Colport to continue to function.
      If the Scottish Government continue to allow a “foreign” (it works both ways) government to load and unload these weapons on Scottish soil….. are they not failing in their first duty of keeping the Scottish people safe ?
      Put Coleport beyond use and they will no take 30yrs to shift their shit…let me tell ya.

      Another thing that is rarely mentioned is that if and while we rent this Base are we in Scotland still restricted from using the waters around it as we are now, just how much of that is to remain under British control ? How much resources would be denied to the West coast during the British presence?
      Could those resources and the regeneration that would follow, potentially be more valuable to the whole Country in the longer term?
      All this needs to be discussed before allowing any arrangements for Faslane and Coleport to be made

    32. Calum McKay says:

      A clean break is needed from England on defence post independence and that includes getting rid of trident as soon as practicably possible.

      The questions, analysis and results are highly questionable fantasy!

      The thought that some would agree or argue an independent Scotland should prostitute itself out to enable England to continue living it’s charade as a world power by possession of weapons of mass destruction is obscene!

    33. Les Wilson says:

      Some have said Scotland would be a target if Trident was here or not. I disagree with that, if we posed no threat to any nation, what would their gain be?

      I for one would feel a little safer if ALL nuclear weapons were removed from our soil, while we would have a radiation problem if the UK was hit at all, it is far less than total destruction of everything. Safer, totally removed.

    34. Roland Smith says:

      5 billion spend as much as Ireland on Defence saves another 2.6. Billion, net some debt against UK assets and GERS deficit disappears and sovereign wealth fund can start up and no unionist threatened cuts. Hope some sensible politicians use this site for inf.

    35. Get them out right away An independent Scotland will not need their blood money so don’t even consider risking Scottish lives for money that we won’t need with our oil and gas wealth

    36. McBoxheid says:

      How about get them to build a facility near Devonport and charge them 5 billion the first year, 7 billion the second, 10 billion the third, increasing exponentionally.
      Nothing like an incentive to build quicker or disarm/scrap them sooner rather than later.

    37. Clootie says:


      We get nothing now as part of the U.K.
      The lease deal gives an income as we undo the Union damage and build the economy.
      At some point when our economy recovers from 300+ years of Westminster inflicted damage we review and set a timeline for removal.

      At the point of Independence “Scottish” political parties have to state in their manifesto what their stance is.

      The same arguement applies to Oil & Gas. At the moment we have ZERO income. However after Independence we manage production and taxation to build a fund for future investment. ( We do not shut all the wells Mr. Harvey)

      You can either have another 300 years of abuse OR a managed transition to a very bright future.

      Nuclear, Oil production rate, Defence Cost….We would now decide. Do not focus on the first decade but on the next thousand!

    38. McBoxheid says:

      Or make them pay for and build 5 frigates in Scotland for the Scottish navy increasing by an increment of 1 per year per year until trident is removed, so by the 3rd year we would have 11 in our navy courteousy of Westminster.

    39. mogabee says:

      Yep, we have to be pragmatic when negotiating and no-one ever gets all they desire.

      Receiving a rent from Westminster might stick in the craw of many but it’s a card we have and when dealing with people with a history of deceit as with W/minster it’s not a bad card to hold.

    40. Footsoldier says:

      O/T BBC Scotland still flogging Brian Taylor’s “A bad end to a bad week for the Scottish government” first published over a week ago.

    41. roddy anderson says:

      What mike cassidy says^^ tho I’d want shot of it straight away!

    42. Shinty says:

      Who would trust them to cough up? Who would trust them to clear up. They still convoy the weapons through highly populated areas, poor safety record.
      Scotland will need to get on with her own business, Trident is preventing better ferry routes, pleasure cruises etc., exploration West of the Clyde.
      By all means use it as a bargaining chip, just remember who we are dealing with here.

    43. ScottieDog says:

      It would probably become indefinite – a valuable income stream of a foreign currency and of course not being a currency issuer ourselves.

    44. Clachangowk says:

      As soon as Scotland is independent Westminster will declare that trident is no longer needed and in any case unaffordable.

      They will state that as Trident is on Scottish territory this will be considered as a Scottish asset when negotiating share of assets; they will further insist that if Scotland does not wish to keep Trident it will be Scotland’s responsibility to dispose of it and to clear up mess left behind.

      Not being cynical – I very much believe that this is what they will try on

    45. Bill says:


      Nope. No and No.

      Does anyone here want to hear from an ex submariner and Trident man?

      Jesus, it’s like 2013 all over again.

    46. Bill says:

      NATO rules: weapons delivery platform, the boat, should not be more than one hour by sea to the loading facility. Hence the neatness of Coulport and Faslane locations.

      There’s more. Before a boat can go on patrol it’s sonar systems must be tested and evaluated. BUTEC base at Kyle provides the only deep and quiet enough location to do such things, the only place in the UK. Can’t be relocated either.

      Scotland has ALL the aces and you don’t believe it or know it.

      There’s loads more.

    47. Bill says:

      Last time this debate came up we heard ideas of relocation to Gibraltar or Kings Bay, it was hilarious.

      I can’t wait to explain how those ideas are utterly crass. Go on, somebody suggest Kings Bay and the sailors can just relocate with their families. Go on, I can do with a laugh.

    48. mike cassidy says:


      But its a lazy Sunday afternoon

      and some of you might need a wee football injection to get you through to the semifinals

    49. Clachangowk says:

      As soon as Scotland is independent Westminster will declare that trident is no longer needed and in any case unaffordable.

      They will state that as Trident is on Scottish territory this will be considered as a Scottish asset when negotiating share of assets; they will further insist that if Scotland does not wish to keep Trident it will be Scotland’s responsibility to dispose of it and to clear up mess left behind.

      Not being cynical – I very much believe that this is what they will try on

    50. Abulhaq says:

      Cyprus is an interesting case. The British have two sovereign enclaves Akrotiri and Dhekelia measuring some
      Whether the British pay the Cypriot gov. for the ceding of the ‘sovereignty’ rights is hard to confirm. That no ‘rental’ changes hands seems rather unlikely given the resentment voiced by many Cypriots concerning the continued foreign occupation.
      The bases are nominally British but there are rumours that the US pays the UK for a continued presence in the region. In the light of defence cuts by London that has a ring of possibility. The Russian fleet has a base at Ladhakiya in Syria about 200km distant so American interest is guaranteed. Developments in the Turkish sphere may also worry the State dept.
      The base commanders do not need to inform the Cypriot gov. about the use to which the bases might be put. However, it is assumed their use would be defensive rather than offensive and unlikely to cause Cyprus to become embroiled in conflict. All rather fuzzy.
      Were Scotland to offer Faslane for rent that £5bn looks on the cheap side. The cost may well be calculated on a scale of strategic importance. Russian spy ships off the coast and the price goes up.
      The idea that the rUK might claim Faslane as sovereign territory, as in Cyprus, was seriously floated by some defence experts prior to indyref1. American involvement in the matter cannot be discounted either.
      The situation of having a border with a nuclear ‘power’ that you’ve just kicked in the psychological guts needs some deep thought too.
      But first things first….

    51. Bill says:

      Kings Bay.

      It’s so monumentally crass that I don’t know where to begin.

      We have 4 boats: one on patrol, one in refit, another in dry dock and one in port. It’s the minimum number of boats to maintain CASD.

      Each has two crews which for the refit and dry dock boats are spread about doing courses, on leave and drafted where else they are needed.

      The submarine in port is preparing to relieve the patrol boat, 3 months alongside Faslane. Many of the crew will also take leave and do some courses and training in the simulators.

      So, when the relieving goes on patrol the other breaks patrol, surfaces the boat and comes home. That crew are now off-crew and the other lot take over.

      They live ashore or on the base and work on the vessel in port, tonnes of maintenance and the usual stuff. They get it ready for its next patrol.

      You’d be asking to relocated all the crews to Kings Bay, do three months dived patrol then three months working alongside and so on. It’d be permanent move for crews. Their wives and children would have to move with them.

      Can you begin to see why it’s crass?

    52. CameronB Brodie says:

      A detail to be sorted out after independence, certainly not an obstacle to the process (of decolonisation). 😉

      Power, violence, and nuclear weapons


      This article contributes to an ongoing debate about the role of the thermonuclear revolution in realist thought and the viability of nuclear disarmament. Drawing on the work of Hannah Arendt, it develops an immanent critique of balance-of-power theories of international politics. Immanent critique is a diagnostic process. It takes a thought system on its own terms and by revealing its contradictions from within, opens up new possibilities for transformation. This critique reveals how the ontological assumptions Kenneth Waltz makes about the nature of power allowed him, in the guise of an apolitical theory, to transform the violence of nuclear weapons from a threat to humanity into a source of security, and therefore a normative good. According to the logic of this argument, thinking past the limits of this thought system will necessarily need to include questioning and otherwise disrupting the tight association between violence and power.

      Nuclear politics: beyond positivism

      Gender and disarmament

    53. Bill says:


      A wee story. Same one I told in 2013 on Wings. Nearly got banned and was called a Loyalis Troll as many didn’t want to hear what I’ve got to say.

      During the 1990’s, notice was served on the Gurkha unit at Garelochead. The unit tasked with protecting the base. The soldiers closed the gate to their compound and said they weren’t leaving. A stand off ensued, on paper at least as it turned out – nobody was willing to go into their camp to enforce the notice.

      No police, Mod Police, Mod officialls, Marines, SBS or anyone at all was willing to push through that gate and ask them to leave. After a couple of weeks they were allowed to stay.

      Any attempt to force the base to move its occupants out will be met by simply shutting the Norh and South main gates. End of.

      What then?

    54. CameronB Brodie says:

      I want them gone as soon as possible but that will only be a benefit of voting Yes, not the reason for doing so. I’m voting Yes to secure the agency I need to determine my future, I’m not voting to cure all of the world’s ills in one go.

      Changing the discourse on nuclear weapons: The humanitarian initiative


      This article examines the progress of the humanitarian initiative to reframe the nuclear weapons discourse internationally. The initiative seeks to shift debate away from theories of strategic stability and towards a focus on the impact of nuclear weapons themselves. This effort has now gathered significant support at an international level, and its implications are increasingly recognized by both nuclear-armed and non-nuclear-armed States. The initiative has been underpinned by the deliberate logic of humanitarian disarmament. A treaty banning nuclear weapons, around which momentum is gathering, would be an achievable, legally coherent and logical next step developing from the initiative.

    55. HandandShrimp says:

      My preference would be to see it go but politics is the art of the doable not the ideal. rUK would want to continue with a base. They would likely relocate because Faslane would be around a corner and up a close in a different country. If Scotland wanted to block access it would be pretty easy. However, in the short to medium term, a deal would be the most likely outcome. I doubt we would get £5bn because I don’t think they could afford £5bn but an understanding would be reached until a more permanent arrangement is built in rUK. There may be quid pro quo. Rent plus perhaps the building of some frigates…some of which may be destined for a Scottish Navy.

      I look forward to the negotiations 🙂

    56. Lenny Hartley says:

      Abulhaq In a past life I was in the RAF based in Cyprus, the Yanks were flying U2 spy planes out of Akrotiri on a daily basis, normally took off about dawn and was top secret, that was until one crashed on takeoff and took out the control tower and comms room. At that time their were some Demo’s as the locals were angry at the Turks being favoured as the Turkish refugees from Greek held areas after the Turkish Invasion in 1974 were being flown out of Akrotiri to Turkey and the Turks were flying them straight back to Turkish held Northern Cyprus and occupying Greek Cypriot properties.
      Apart from that period of about three months We certainly were not treated as invaders in fact I would go as far as saying they welcomed us. That was forty odd years ago , i dont know what its like now.
      I once spoke to a civvie working at Faslane , she told me that the thought there was that it would become a Sovereign Base Area. i told her no chance. For me I want rid of it within two years.
      As well as the safety issues there is a substantial oilfield in the Clyde estuary which has not been develloped due to Mod objections.

    57. Hamish100 says:

      Any attempt to force the base to move its occupants out will be met by simply shutting the Norh and South main gates. End of.
      What then?

      Dig a tunnel, bring some ladders, Have 30000 Independence suppoerters with wire cutters.

      You claim you were nearly banned from the site and called a yoonist troll.

      If I can paraphrase from the Life of Brian again I think “… you are just a silly little boy…”

      ps Sail in !!!

    58. Bill says:

      Thanks Hamish, just the response I expected.

      I’m hardly a wee silly boy at the age of 48 but he-ho!

      Your idea is really stupid, you’d want to evict the crews, staff and its protectors by force, I assume you’re joking.

      Commanchio unit would eat you for breakfast.

    59. Macbeda says:

      I do wish peeps would stop referring rUK.
      After indy there will only be the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland.
      UK will disappear.

    60. schrodingers cat says:

      by force, why?

      let them starve, die of old age or just get bored.

    61. yesindyref2 says:

      In terms of removal time, the white paper had 5 years but hinted at longer, one or two reports put it at 2 years which is impractical unless based in the US or France for a time, and perhaps that made Hammond then Defence Secretary say it would need at least 10 years which, in politician language, meant it had been assessed at 10 years by those who know.

      On the other hand if it could be based in France or the US which is fairly unlikely and there is the NNPT angle there too, it could be 2 years and still stay operational.

      As for straight removal of the missiles and warheads, Francis Tusa who is well respected put it at 2 months, with Burghfield having its licence and in fact renovated a few years back. That would be fine for the duty boat, and even perhaps for the standby boat, but after 3-6 months the UK would be left without operational capability, i.e. deterrent no more.

      A main problem is marrying warhead to missile, and loading a 55 tonne fuelled up missile vertically ino the silo of the boat, for which a semi-floating dock is used, as well as on-site ready storage.

      I believe both of these could be solved at or near Devonport, perhaps also using Falmouth, but it would take time. Milport Haven on the other hand is too near a massive oil refinery which is a bit of a problem really.

      Incidentally, it’s quite possible the UK has already started preparations and it could now be less than 10 years. Before making substantial changes you’d have to extensively change Devonport even though it can and does currently berth a Vanguard at times (see marinetraffic and Navy notes). But it doesn’t arm and load Trident there.

      And Devonport is getting virtually emptied, as the SSNs (attack subs) are getting moved to Faslane. Perhaps that’s a secondary or even primary plan in case of the need to relocate Trident and the boats.

    62. Les Wilson says:

      A little bit of info,

      There is a new weapon that the US has, which has the power of a small nuclear bomb, but has no radiation. So there are now, options for destruction that are “safer” for mankind.

      “One meme floating around is that the US employed a new super weapon, dubbed the “Rod from God.” It’s basically a tungsten rod, a foot in diameter and 20 feet long, dropped from orbit. It only uses kinetic energy, so there’s no radioactive fallout, but it’s as devastating as a small nuclear explosion.”

      This was in context of North Korea, nuclear testing site.

    63. Bill says:

      It was contributors like you that rounded on me for asserting:

      1. Trident cant be moved, unless disarmament is intended.

      2. You wont be able to force them out with protesters, once the gate is shut that’s it.

      Best solution was to rent it out till its renewal date of 2025 giving rUK a chance to decide what to do. That idea was asserted in 2013/14 but as events overtook themselves the next viable option is rent it out till rUK build a new Faslane/ Coulport arrangement.

      We will remain a target for a generation, itd make no difference if Trident left after independence following a 2014 victory and makes no difference once we (hopefully) leave soon.

      You really think Putin will re-programme his nukes to bomb only across the border? Scotland would be a NATO member and a target.

    64. I can see the logic of SNP/Indy supporters allowing Westminster to keep trident for a minimal rent, namely that Westminster has frequently attacked/invaded/’liberated’ any country that they perceive as endangering their interests -and although Scotland has some aces, WM will still control the military in Scotland, which is arguably the ultimate ace up their sleeve.

      If Scotland charged too much for Faslane or demanded Trident be removed immediately, WM could simply garrison the base and occupy a large chunk of Scotland to boot.

      The same applies for the oil fields and/or other energy supplies. Don’t think Westminster will give the slightest damn for international treaties or law: they may even use Faslane as the excuse to blockade the ports and oil terminals, and if they do, Scotland can’t really do very much about it.

      It isn’t morally right, and I wish Scotland could just tell them to take their nuclear toys and play elsewhere, but it is unfortunately the Westminster approach to any problem: bribery, and if that doesn’t work, force.

      I hope and rather suspect that the SNP is already aware of this and will be willing to make a deal.

    65. yesindyref2 says:

      @Ken500: “There is no way £5Billion would be paid for a lease.

      I tend to agree in cash terms, but the lease could be paid in kind, like training, logistics, even defence while the Scottish forces got built up. And of course there’s warship building. You want Trident to stay here? Give us your contracts. Just as long as they’re part payment. Or being taken in lieu of debt repayments. But cash value £5 billion does soound reasonable tome, after all, we’d be being kind enough giving the rUK time to relocate them sensible and cost-effectively.

      Total cost of that relocation though is going to be less than £20 billion, and probably dropping. First silly estimates were £50 billion upwards and decades. No, 10 years is enough, with some wriggle rom for the usual MOD delays. Pay me.

    66. galamcennalath says:


      To summarise, then. If iEngland wishes to retain the Trident nuclear deterrent operational it can only so do with the consent of the iScottish government.

      Since they are unlikely to get an open ended lease, iEngland can’t maintain their WMDs long term.

    67. Jock McDonnell says:

      Hey, Macart – Scotland won’t be a new nation state, we will be resuming our previous status – as I’m sure you know
      How else can there be a treaty dating from 1707 😉

      And on Faslane folks – there is a deal there to be done without acrimony – They will want us in NATO – they won’t want Vlad getting access to the Clyde.

    68. yesindyref2 says:

      Gibraltar has its own power station with a new one on its way, it has water, it has food, it has an airfield, and open sea access. As do the Falklands.

      Faslane and Coulport have none of the above, and access to the open sea would be through sovereign Scottish territory. Contractors and civilians arrive by road, not by parachute.

      Neither can continue to operate without the co-operation of the Scottish Government, unless indeed the rUK wishes to invade and take over Scotland as a whole.

    69. Roland Smith says:

      Give them say 10 years to move, capitalise the sum and write off a huge chunk of our so called inherited debt. If we can start out with a minimal deficit and oil revenue going into a savings account as per GC that would be a happy state.

    70. Alt Clut says:

      Deeply saddened that we are having this discussion. I’ve never been interested in ‘independence for its own sake’ whatever that means. If we are really as feeble on the Trident issue as the poll suggests then I seriously wonder if all the sweat and shoe leather of campaigning is worth it. First time I’ve ever felt it but this could take ‘the lead’ right out of my YES ‘pencil’.

    71. Vronsky says:

      As a mathematical necessity, 50% of voters are below average intelligence. That’s all you’re seeing.

    72. Ken500 says:

      £5Billion is ridiculous. £15Billion+ a year. Even more waste. Especially when it goes up in smoke. Pollution all around. Not bloody likely. Japan nuclear catastrophe is still being cleaned up. Chernobyl has a steel cover that will maybe last 100 years. Cost £Billions. Some people never learn. Damnation and radiation.

      Chernobyl new safe? containment. Nov 2017. Manufactured by a French company.

    73. Bradford Millar says:

      3 years at the earliest and 5 years maximum rental lease at £5 billion a year and by the 5th year Trident must be removed from Faslane

    74. Ken500 says:

      The Poll is used to manipulate the result. £5Billion a year. Not likely. Hypothetical.

    75. Abulhaq says:

      @Lenny Hartley
      Your account of US missions is significant. Given the volatility in the eastern Med. Cyprus is a comparative haven of stability. The Brit presence may be rationalised by the existence of the Turkish backed republic in N Cyprus. The Brits will stop the Turks, or something of the sort.
      There is local nationalist hostility but the bases do provide work for some 8000 Cypriots. A veritable dilemma.
      The attitude of governments is ambivalent. Most Cypriot politicians would rather the bases were not there but on the other hand….
      Faslane’s importance to the UK suggests the facility would not be given up, removed or relocated without a struggle.

    76. galamcennalath says:

      The Norwegian TV series Occupied makes for interesting viewing, and food for thought.

      The plot – a near future Norway elects a Green government which wishes to cut back on oil production and threaten supply. The EU needs the oil so allows Russian to move in, initially only to take control of the oil installations. The US has become isolationist.

      This little bit improbable scenario is the backdrop of a political thriller.

      My point is, an iScotland may have its freedom of manoeuvre regarding the housing of WMDs curtained by a bigger global picture. We can expect external interference.

    77. Dan Huil says:

      Just get rid of it.

    78. Bill says:

      yesindyref2 says:

      8 July, 2018 at 4:13 pm

      Gibraltar has its own power station with a new one on its way, it has water, it has food, it has an airfield, and open sea access. As do the Falklands.

      Sorry, oh God! not the Falklands or Gibraltar idea again.

      Your all mad!

      Im done.

    79. yesindyref2 says:

      @Bill “Sorry, oh God! not the Falklands or Gibraltar idea again.

      What idea? The point is that the Falklands and Gibraltar are either self-sustaining, or have open access, as bases whereas Faslane and Coulport don’t, so Faslane and Coulport can’t be a “sovereign base” without the full co-operation of the Scottish Government.

      Im done

      Or undone.

    80. Orri says:


      Someone who pretends to understand military reality doesn’t have a clue how a siege works?

    81. stewartb says:

      I’m no defence expert but surely we also need to factor in the set-up and operational requirements of the new Scottish Defence Force in the first decade post independence for use of the Faslane facilities.

      Undoubtedly there is a deal to be done but I would want this to be stoutly based upon a non-negotable ‘principle’ – that Trident and its arsenal at Coulport will be all out of Scotland by year X, where X is as short a time as possible, judged by safety and environmental concerns. I would want this ‘principle’ to be set out in advance of an IndyRef2 although it needs to be recognised that a democratically elected Scottish Government could conceivably alter such a policy position.

      In terms of net income to the SG from allowing continued access to Faslane and Coulport facilities for a strictly limited period, the scale of charge levied should to be considered alongside any ongoing ‘Annual Solidarity Payment’ to England (modelled at £5bn?) as recently proposed by the Growth Commission, should this proposal be implemented. I’d struggle to justify ‘generosity’ towards England either over Trident or a solidarity payment.

    82. Josef Ó Luain says:

      Thanks for the reminder:not by-a-longshot are a majority of Scots opposed to nuclear submarines and warheads on Scottish soil and not-by-a-longshot are they all enamoured by the EU. I believe you pointed this out fairly recently.These are crucial factors which can’t be cited often enough.

    83. Brian MacLeod says:

      Out the day after independence.
      We cannot trust Westminster to follow safe practices, and at some stage they would pollute our entire West coast.
      They can get the USA to store the WMDs. They need their permission anyway.
      The Scottish navy will need the base.
      Alternatively, we can send Trident back to Westminster, airmail.

    84. Capella says:

      Makes a “Tory Scum Out” banner sound eminently reasonable.

      It took the Spaniards two years to get rid of all the American hardware parked in their country. I would say that is time enough and collecting £5 billion a year, or more, during that period would be reasonable too. What the decontamination costs would be is probably incalculable.

      But I want rid of them asap.

    85. Cloggins says:

      Why am I not surprised at the opinion of white settlers?
      Are there any reasons why any country should offer a free ride to its dominant, arrogant and ignorant neighbours?

      When they built an arms depot in the next door garden they might have forseen it would not be forever. They failed to prepare for the future and it will cost them.

      I’m telling you, it will all end in tears.

    86. CameronB Brodie says:

      Alt Clut
      Independence is vital, in itself. Without self-determination, Scotland will never posses adequate agency to effectively promote it’s identity and culture. Without self-determination, Scots will never get the opportunity to access inalienable human rights (e.g. the Right to Development). Without self-determination, Scotland will never be a healthy nation.

      British nationalism and London rule = lack of agency and poor mental health for Scots

    87. Kennedy says:

      I can see why folk would like the idea and £5b is no small change.

      However, I would like trident gone before an accident happens. Or before there are leaks (more leaks probably)and the area is contaminated for thousands of years.

      Plus I don’t trust Westminster at all and would only deal with them with the EU at our back.

      To be honest I would take the deal if it was the only way we got freedom but there should be a time limit. A transition period (ha ha). Forget that I don’t trust them.

    88. sandy says:

      Time lease on Coulport/Faslane. Preparations for removal to be instigated immediately. Meanwhile, £5B up front then increasing annually by 10%+. Total clean-up to strict international standards @ end of lease.

    89. Bill McLean says:

      Abulhaq – “the Brits will stop the Turks”. The Brits, probably deliberately, failed to stop the Turks in 1974 except that they maintained the Eastern Sovereign Base. The Brits are now much reduced from those days and could not stop a heavily armed, supremely professional, supremely tough Turkish army. However, I do not believe that Turkey has designs on the Republic of Cyprus at this time or in the foreseeable future.

    90. Thepnr says:


      “There is local nationalist hostility but the bases do provide work for some 8000 Cypriots.”

      This is incorrect as there are 1200 locals employed at the bases according to the MOD.

      The SBAs are retained for military purposes, with the status of a British Overseas Territory, and with a resident population of some 10,000 Cypriot citizens.

      The SBAs are manned by British Forces Cyprus(BFC) with around 2,700 (mostly Army) personnel. The RAF also has a significant presence, with around 900 personnel. The military are supported by some 300 UK?based civilians and 1,200 locally employed civilians.…/overseas_territories.pdf

    91. Bill says:

      yesindyref2 says:
      8 July, 2018 at 4:49 pm
      @Bill “Sorry, oh God! not the Falklands or Gibraltar idea again.”

      What idea? The point is that the Falklands and Gibraltar are either self-sustaining, or have open access, as bases whereas Faslane and Coulport don’t, so Faslane and Coulport can’t be a “sovereign base” without the full co-operation of the Scottish Government.

      “Im done”

      Or undone.

      Orri says:
      8 July, 2018 at 4:50 pm

      Someone who pretends to understand military reality doesn’t have a clue how a siege works

      So, Orri are you suggesting that I’m pretending to be an ex submariner?

      And as for locating Trident in the Falklands or Gibraltar, I’m sorry you need you head looking at.

    92. Bill says:

      I can’t believe I’m having to respond to ideas of setting up Trident in the Falklands.

      Having just spent 6 months working there recently I’m in stitches just now. And as for Gibraltar, it’s not even physically feasible. Get a grip of yourselves folks.

    93. yesindyref2 says:

      @Abulhaq “removed or relocated without a struggle

      That constant urge to arms and violence, eh Abulhaq?

      The language of aggression.

    94. yesindyref2 says:

      @Bill: “I can’t believe I’m having to respond to ideas of setting up Trident in the Falklands.

      Are you unable to read and comprehend the English language?

      The comparison is as a base with access, NOT a suggestion that the Falklands – or Gibralatar – be used as a base for Trident and the SSBNs.

    95. Thepnr says:

      Bad link supplied earlier for the info on civilian employees on Cyprus bases. Direct link to download the pdf.

    96. PETEM13 says:

      There are also the old submarines at the Rosyth. Naval base. I’d suggest that they should be moved down to the Thames right besiide e Parliament. That should focus their atttention somewhat!

    97. call me dave says:

      Mike Russell: Brexit plan ‘has fair bit to go to protect Scotland’

      He also suggested that if most Scots voted again to stay in the EU then that could be “recognition that Scotland wished to be independent”.

      Well done Russell Knox at the golf. Irish Open winner!

    98. ronnie anderson says:

      O/T .

      Sees You’s there .

    99. Bill says:


      That’s it, keep the insults coming like the rest.

      A base with access – What are you even talking about? Typical slavering havering civvy combing out with shite about something they have zero understanding.

    100. Bill says:

      They beat you in 2014 with a fake vow in the Daily Record and they’ve successfully convinced you Trident can simply be moved anywhere in the world.

      I can’t help you guys. Some are too thick to understand it seems.

    101. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Alt Clut @ 16:17:

      First time I’ve ever felt it but this could take the lead right out of my YES pencil.

      Oh dear. This kind of issue does bring out unproductive à la carte indy sentiments like this (genuine or contrived), and also large doses of whitabooterie. Work-ins at Faslane, post-indy? Geez.

      Frankly my dears, I don’t give a damn.

      Some kind of agreement will have to be negotiated and no doubt Faslane/Coulport will (have to) be a part of it. How could it be otherwise?

      Just possibly rUK* will decide to cut its losses and give up the deterrent completely, thereby removing any possible lease income for us. Unlikely though, because of the huge implications for its standing in the wider world.

      Whatever. My crystal ball doesn’t work that far ahead, so my answer is dead simple:

      independence first

      Without that, no negotiation of any kind will happen, and we’ll continue to be lumbered with what we already have, without a penny of income provided and at someone else’s entire discretion.

      *(Oh, and BTW, as long as NI sticks with England, rUK is exactly what it is.)

    102. Dr Jim says:

      I’m no expert on defence but England would never even if it could park Trident and all that goes with it in a place like the Falklands for the simple reason there aren’t enough people to kill there to make the rest of the world outraged enough at whoever would blow the place up too easily

      You need outrage to get a real bit of anger going and as we Scots are expendable and always have been our obliteration would serve that problem nicely for the Britnats

      That’s why Trident is here in Scotland and and was never considered to be parked in the big country of importance right in the middle of their own voters and taxpayers

      Trident is Scotlands nuclear poll tax

    103. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Bill @ 18:01:

      They beat you in 2014

      Hi sailor! So if we’re “you”, who are you…?

    104. Maxwelltown says:

      So 80% want to take bribes or let the Brits keep their nuclear warheads on our soil?…I really wonder if our population have any guts left or only think in terms of money when Indy is mentioned.

      Why wouldn’t we tell them to GTF on Indy day and make all the necessary arrangements for them to load up and move out asap? Either we are Sovereign nation or we are still mentally slaves and cowering curs.

      The Base should be our Scottish Navy’s home and the Clyde could become (again) the workshop for building our ships and extracting the huge resources of oil untapped and waiting to be extracted. The jobs and wealth generated would make an illusory £5 billion p.a. look absurd. The Brits would never pay it anyway and we’d end up with a lease and situation like Guantananmo,where the Yanks won’t pay or leave.

      The REV’s polls really makes me ponder as to whether our electorate is as dumb and as venal as these responses demonstrate.

    105. Fireproofjim says:

      I see the “non-sectarian” Orange Order has been spitting on a Catholic priest today in Glasgow.
      As they claimed only last week to have no religious bias I expect that Ministers of every religion from Anabaptists to Zoroastrians can expect their turn for a shower of spit from that direction and if not why not. They can’t claim lack of bias otherwise.
      (I did write “shower of SPIT” but the alternative is a good description of that disgusting gang.)

    106. Orri says:


      Given that the chat was about what Scotland could do should the rUK refuse to vacate Faslane and the mention of food and water then I’m going to repeat. They’d be starved out. No need to face a horde of very polite but nonetheless deadly Ghurkas.

      Meanwhile nets would serve to close the passage to or from Faslane assuming the submarine commanders refused to follow international law and surface when in Scotland’s waters.

    107. Lochside says:

      So 80% want to take bribes or let the Brits keep their nuclear warheads on our soil?…I really wonder if our population have any guts left or only think in terms of money when Indy is mentioned.

      Why wouldn’t we tell them to GTF on Indy day and make all the necessary arrangements for them to load up and move out asap? Either we are Sovereign nation or we are still mentally slaves and cowering curs.

      The Base should be our Scottish Navy’s home and the Clyde could become (again) the workshop for building our ships and extracting the huge resources of oil untapped and waiting to be extracted. The jobs and wealth generated would make an illusory £5 billion p.a. look absurd. The Brits would never pay it anyway and we’d end up with a lease and situation like Guantananmo,where the Yanks won’t pay or leave.

      The REV’s polls really makes me ponder as to whether our electorate is as dumb and as venal as these responses demonstrate.

    108. harry mcaye says:

      Q23? That’s a hell of a lot of questions. Apologies if this has already been addressed but if that’s at one sitting, come question 23 I’d be caring less and less about my answers and just wishing it was over.

    109. A2 says:

      You need to be asking the same question about Coulport, they subs are not the only Nukes hanging about!

    110. schrodingers cat says:

      still think ebay is our best bet

    111. Helena Brown says:

      I want rid of the things as soon as possible but should
      this be impossible charge them through the nose for rent and if they default put them in the blackmarket for the best possible price. Do not forget to charge for storing their decrepit subs at Rosyth.

    112. Bill says:

      Subs – subsistence, a payment of cash daily to submariners when in foreign port. Sometimes we’d be in for couple of weeks and stay in a hotel. Just covering duties. Fun days!

      Boat – a submarine.

      Just saying.

    113. Proud Cybernat says:

      Isn’t it illegal under international law for a country to insist that another sovereign country hosts its nuclear arsenal? It may take some time to action the removal but international law requires that the rUK MUST remove this obscenity from Scottish soil when we become an independent, sovereign nation.

      We should not “rent” the base. We should financially PENALISE rUK for every year these obscene WMDs remain on our soil with an ever increasing penalty the longer the rUK evades having them removed.

      Not a “rent” but a PENALTY.

    114. Robert Peffers says:

      @galamcennalath says: 8 July, 2018 at 12:43 pm:

      ” … More and more I think some voters aren’t doing joined up politics”

      Nah! It isn’t that they are not doing joined up politics, galamcennalath. It’s that they aren’t doing joined up thinking.

      In some cases it’s that they aren’t even doing thinking at all. Some are led by the nose and simply repeat verbatim whatever they are told to repeat by their lords and masters.

    115. galamcennalath says:

      call me dave says:

      Mike Russell … suggested that if most Scots voted again to stay in the EU then that could be “recognition that Scotland wished to be independent”.

      Yes, he’s taking a very strong position. I doubt if it’s off the cuff and more likely to be emerging policy. i.e. Scots should have a say on the proposed Brexit outcome and since there is no status quo, the options must be follow England out, or stay close to the EU with Indy.

      The same scenario would make sense for NI. They leave with England and accept a border, or the stay in the EU as part of a reunited Ireland.

      Will the Tories have any of this? Not if they can help it! However should an EURef2 occur (perhaps after a GE) it should be about England leaving not just the EU, but parting company with other UK members.

    116. Ian Foulds says:

      Macbeda at 3.57pm

      No UK on Independence.

      That might depend on the question?

      If we want to be free from Westminster, I guess we still might be part of the UK.

      That I believe is our first goal of Independence.

      After our separation from Westminster, I would hope that our status UKwise and, many other issues, might then be put to the Sovereign people of Scotland, by the incumbent Government for the Scottish people to decide.

      Kind regards,


    117. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Not a “rent” but a PENALTY.

      £10 Billion Y1

      £20 Billion Y2

      £40 Billion Y3

      £80 Billion Y4

      £160 Billion Y5

      etc. etc. etc.

    118. Patrick Roden says:

      @ Bill ” They beat YOU”
      Oh dear, not very good at the ‘concerned yes voter’ thing, are you Bill.

      Lock the gates?

      Go ahead! it no longer functions as a nuclear submarine base, if they can’t get the nuclear war-heads, into the base.

    119. CameronB Brodie says:

      Re. a lack of joined up thinking in the community. Remember me mentioning Critical Evolutionery Psychology? Well, crap in crap out, as they say.

      SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY: An Agentic Perspective

      Key Words
      biosocial coevolution, collective efficacy, emergent properties, human agency, self-efficacy

      The capacity to exercise control over the nature and quality of one’s life is the essence of humanness. Human agency is characterized by a number of core features that operate through phenomenal and functional consciousness. These include the temporal extension of agency through intentionality and forethought, self-regulation by self-reactive influence, and self-reflectiveness about one’s capabilities, quality of functioning, and the meaning and
      purpose of one’s life pursuits. Personal agency operates within a broad network of sociostructural influences. In these agentic transactions, people are producers as well as products of social systems.

      Social cognitive theory distinguishes among three modes of agency: direct personal agency, proxy agency that relies on others to act on one’s behest to secure desired outcomes, and collective agency exercised through socially coordinative and interdependent effort. Growing transnational embeddedness and interdependence are placing a premium on collective efficacy to exercise control over personal destinies and national life.

    120. Greannach says:

      Why is Novichok allowed to roam around southern England poisoning people, then turn up at Wimbledon hoping for a win?
      Does nobody care?

    121. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Apparently, the priest episode is the SNP’s fault.

      That’s according to ex Lord Provost Michael Kelly, on The Twitter.


    122. Robert Peffers says:

      @cearc says: 8 July, 2018 at 12:48 pm:

      ” … I think that the question is a bit flawed, in that one year for removal is probably impractical.”

      Where do you get that idea from, cearc?

      The submarines are mobile devices that go out on patrols all over the World’s Oceans and they sometimes berth in foreign ports, (you can berth a self-reliant boat anywhere with a deep enough draft of water).

      The refuelling and refitting of the vessels was transferred from Rosyth to Devonport very quickly when Westminster privatised Rosyth and the warheads are also mobile and are regularly transported by road through Scotland, including through Glasgow and the missiles can also, probably be transported elsewhere.

      If all else failed the Kingdom of England cam move their share out of Scotland, (can we please stop going along with the Westminster propaganda that Scotland would be, “leaving the United Kingdom”?

      There are only two kingdom in the United Kingdom as per the Treaty of Union 1706/7 and when Scotland says the union is over the union thus ends and all the assets are joint property).

      Thus if the Kingdom of England wants the whole caboodle they must buy it from Scotland at whatever price Scotland demands or Scotland sells Scotland’s share to the Highest bidders.

      When the United Kingdom disunites then, as an equally sovereign partner kingdom, The Kingdom of Scotland owns a negotiable part of all the former United Kingdom’s assets including the armed forces and their equipment.

      If they want the whole shebang then they either pay for it or we scrap our share of anything still in Scotland.

    123. Graeme McCormick says:

      £5b the same as the Growth Commission’s suggested Continuity Payment.

      Very much against both but don’t mind helping our relatives in the South from our aid budget.

      Faslane already costs the Helensburgh economy probably over £200 m per annum due to the failure of 85% of the navy personnel living in the South and just staying half the week in the Base Accommodation. As relatively little of the Base is used for the nuclear fleet there are issues of how a Scottish Defence Force would share the Base.

      The Scottish Government should put the U.K. government on notice that the Base must be cleared within 12 months of the Referendum. It’s a red line as far as I’m concerned, I don’t Central Scotland a target in any war games by Little Britain

    124. Ian Foulds says:

      McBoxheid at 1.55pm

      Incentive indeed but we want the whole area to be radiation free.

      How can we be assured of that?


    125. pipinghot says:


      Your last post is a peach, well done!

    126. mike cassidy says:

      Re Britain and Cyprus.

      This is a must read from last year.

      “The sovereign bases were reaffirmed as part of Cyprus’s Treaty of Accession to the EU in 2003. Brexit could complicate things further…”

    127. Thepnr says:

      @mike cassidy

      Good article and some proper journalism.

    128. Footsoldier says:

      If the SNP support a UK referendum on the final details of Brexit, Indyref2, could face the same hurdle down the line if Yes wins.

      Could of course be part of a new plan to convert soft No’s to Yes leaving only the hurdle of the final deal for independence.

    129. McBoxheid says:

      McBoxheid at 1.55pm

      Incentive indeed but we want the whole area to be radiation free.

      How can we be assured of that?

      fucked if I know

    130. wull2 says:

      Independence first.

      Then Scotland will decide if we want to discuss Red or Grey squirrels.
      Lets walk first before we start kicking anything out the pram.

    131. McBoxheid says:

      Ian Foulds says:
      McBoxheid says:
      8 July, 2018 at 8:28 pm

      McBoxheid at 1.55pm

      Incentive indeed but we want the whole area to be radiation free.

      How can we be assured of that?

      fucked if I know

    132. Shug says:

      Bbc politics show with brewar was a classic propaganda piece
      Asked mike russell about a second eu ref also being taken as one for independence. Russell said no but i suppose if you said that at outset ok
      Then he introduces 2 unionists in the studio to shout down the mater as a proposition from mike russell
      Yes there will be chaos on the streets if gglasgow tonight – a total lie by brewar

    133. Robert Peffers says:

      @Macart says: 8 July, 2018 at 1:20 pm:

      Whoa! There Macart – whose side are you on here?

      I was typing a detailed response to your comment when it vanished into the Ether. Here is the more brief version:-

      ” … The base and facility would of necessity still be rUK responsibility for the term of any lease and the lease would be agreed between nation states (permission sought and given).”

      Oh! No it would not. Here’s why:-

      (1) – The United Kingdom is just that – Two equally sovereign KINGDOMS, that agreed by International Treaty to become, “The United Kingdom”. They did not agree to become a united country. Thus, when the union ends there cannot remain an rUK.

      ” … Scotland as a new nation state would not be allowed to become (nor would seek to be) a nuclear power.”

      Scotland, either as a country or as a kingdom existed long before there was a country or kingdom of England so Scotland cannot be a new nation state as the country & Kingdom of Scotland has never ceased to exist.

      When the United Kingdom is ended by Scotland ending the union the United Kingdom reverts to, “The Status Quo Ante and that was as two equally sovereign kingdoms before the two united by treaty in 1706/7.

      That Status Quo Ante was what is known as, “The Union of the Crowns”. That is – The Crowns were united – not the kingdoms.

      In point of fact there were four crowns united in 1603 – not two. The English Kingdom had forcibly annexed, (not united with), the independent principality of Wales by a decree made by the King of England at Rhuddlan Castle in 1284, (The Statute of Rhuddlan). The English Crown had also annexed the Crown of Ireland by forcing the Parliament of the Kingdom of Ireland to pass The Crown of Ireland Actin 1542.

      Thus in 1603 the King of Scots, who wore the Crown of the Kingdom of Scotland inherited the other three Crowns. But for the fact that under independent Scots law a monarch is NOT sovereign then the entire British Isles would have become the Kingdom of Scotland under the rule of law of the three country Kingdom of England.

      So, please, can we NOT have the Westminster brainwashed claims that Scotland is leaving the United Kingdom and the United Kingdom still existing.

      Both previous kingdoms will revert to the status that prevailed before 1706/7 and certainly neither will be united with any other kingdoms Neither Wales or Ireland were voluntarily united with the Kingdom of England but that, of necessity, must remain a legal battle for after the United Kingdom of 1706/7 has been dissolved legally.

      Don’t know about anyone else but I will be fighting just as hard for our Celtic Brethren’s freedom as I have, all my life, for Scotland’s freedom but that, unfortunately, is a separate and different legal battle – but one that too is winnable.

    134. Thepnr says:

      There could be another election before Brexit, well at least if May is replaced as leader the public will expect one, according to this poll reported in the Independent.

      General election must be held if Tory plotters oust Theresa May, British public say in poll

      More than half of those questioned in the exclusive BMG survey for The Independent said the Conservatives could not switch leaders without returning to the country…

      More than 1,500 respondents were asked to imagine a scenario in which Theresa May resigned as leader of the Conservatives, with them then being asked whether the party should select a new leader and prime minister “without a general election being held” or “with a general election being held immediately afterward”.

      Once “don’t knows” were removed, the majority for an immediate election soared to 63 per cent against 37 per cent who believed the new leader could continue without a fresh mandate from the public.

      63% wanting another election if the Prime Minister is replaced would be kind of hard to ignore, even by the BBC.

    135. Bill says:

      And strike three….

      After posting some home truths about Trident, once again I’m accused by Wingers as;

      1. Fake Yesser
      2. Fake ex submariner
      3. Fake

      As the person behind outing alomost all of Twitters Yoon Trolls and the same guy who has tried since 2013 to get you muppets to understand this subject I say to you;

      Go fuck yourselves, I’m done. Good luck with indyref 2.

    136. Dan Huil says:

      British nationalism’s friendly day out:

      A facebook entry by the Archdiocese of Glasgow [found on Joanna Cherry’s twitter site]:

      “Orange Marches … good for Scotland?

      Yesterday evening [Saturday 7/7/18] after vigil Mass at St Alphonsus, Canon Tom White was meeting and greeting parishioners.
      An Orange march approached.

      Police – who had been guarding the church – were called away to deal with another nearby incident leaving the priest and parishioners defenceless.
      Canon White and parishioners were subjected to vile abuse … ‘Fenian bastard’ being the most typical.

      The priest was spat upon. Spittle landed on the back of his head. He wiped it away. Another mouthful of thick spittle was spat into his eye socket. Again he wiped it away leaving his hand full of the vile liquid.

      He was then further insulted and lunged at by a man carrying a pole before police arrived to restore some kind of order.”

    137. Hamish100 says:

      Oh dear what upset you. Be a big boy and recognise we can disagree with you.

    138. Stoker says:

      Bill wrote on 8 July, 2018 at 12:38 pm

      “Post independence without Trident won’t change anything regarding being a target.

      Rent it out till rUK have a built new Faslane / Coulport bases, which is about 25-30 years.”

      Pish! And even more pish! It would take nowhere near 25-30yrs.

      Then Bill asks: “Can we have a grown up debate about this now?”

      I rest my case m’lud. I’m all for the annually increasing penalty charge suggested further up thread. Get rid ASAP!

    139. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Haven’t read all comments above so I’m not taking sides re whatever Bill was saying…

      I want it gone, same as most folk, but I can’t see it happening in my lifetime (say, next 20 yrs or so). If I was the mandarin in charge of telling the rUK govt what its Trident policy is post-Indy, it would be straightforward – we ain’t shifting. Faslane could become the equivalent of Guantanamo in Cuba, a de facto region of another nation. And there’s fuck all we could do about it.

    140. Socrates MacSporran says:

      Thepnr @ 8.52pm

      Not sure about your final statement, that 63% in favour of an immediate election could not be ignored by the BBC.

      They have managed to ignore a 62% vote in favour of staying in the EU for two years now.

    141. MacMina MacAllan says:

      Like others I was dismayed by the number of apparent Yes/SNP supporters choosing to allow Trident to remain without charge. My dearest wish is to see Trident removed and from canvassing experience and other dialogue cannot get my mind round the figures. Have we been infiltrated by liars claiming to be Yessers? Trolls in the polls?

      Certainly has a psychological depressive effect. A new project fear tactic?

    142. mike cassidy says:

      Re all the Trident posts.

      Reread the first post on this thread.

      A decision made in Scotland by the people of Scotland.

      And in case this has not been posted before –

      here’s one of the SIU lot on the possibilities of defence spending in an independent Scotland.(wouldn’t archive)

      Some of the comments are entertaining, too.

      Over to the defence expert wingers.

    143. Thepnr says:

      It’s OK to discuss issues like Trident but not really that productive as regards winning Independence. Like the National Debt it’s just another one of many issues that would need negotiating and resolving.

      I’d prefer to see articles like this on Wings Over scotland AFTER Independence but maybe that’s just me. For sure it’s a very important issue and one that for a lot of people if a defining issue. However we do know that there is in fact still a majority in Scotland in favour of Trident according to polls.

      This is an issue that divides us, just as membership of the EU does. I’d park this for now and all the other areas of disagreement, like the Queen as without Independence then it doesn’t really matter what our views are, does it?

      We only have the one job to do and that’s convincing the people of Scotland that they will have the power to make all these decisions only with Independence.

      Let’s focus on that first and foremost if we want to win.

    144. Thepnr says:

      @Socrates MacSporran

      UK poll though not Scottish so wouldn’t be ignored like we are 🙂

    145. Alba woman says:

      My 80 year old friend was making her way to her birthday bash near Bellahouston park….she had to cross the road while the OO marchers were passing….she stepped out during a break in the bands and was grabbed by her arm by a woman….this person shouted into my friends face ‘ haw you, you cannae break the march ‘ my friend declined her order….Fortunately a police officer stepped in and ensured my friends crossing.

      On the way home she told me that the top deck of her bus was full of OO people singing and shouting foul songs and chants

      The OO has been given a boost to its morale from Ruth Davidson’s choice of candidates for her merry band of misoginists and bigots

    146. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Alba woman –

      If you don’t mind me asking, when did this incident with your friend happen?

    147. Robert Peffers says:

      @Liz g says: 8 July, 2018 at 1:27 pm:

      “That Base would be denied to Scotland’s Navy while the British are in it,we would have to find and set up another Base.
      So….. are we to have a 2nd class location?”

      Nah! Rosyth is not an inferior Naval Base. The reason that The Clyde Base was chosen as the Trident Base was because the Nuclear boats could sail in and out in deep water.

      As a Scottish Navy would have no need for nuclear armed or nuclear powered vessels Rosyth would in fact be far better in both size and facilities. It was, after all, built where it is for the express reason of location to cover the strategic northern areas during both WWI & WWII. Rosyth has the biggest dry docks in the whole of Britain.

      I spent my entire working life in Rosyth Dockyard and the first thing I learned about Rosyth was the, still fresh in people’s memory, the history of what became known as, “The Forth Bridge Air Raid”.

      The thing was that Hitler had made it very clear that he would not be attempting to attack the main vital links like the Forth Bridge as he would need them when he took over. The Target the Germans were after was in fact the main capital ship of the Royal Navy = HMS Hood that was under refit in the largest Rosyth Dry Dock – the very same Dry Dock used for the new Aircraft Carriers.

      Thus the very first air raid upon Britain in WWII was to try and destroy HMS Hood, the pride of the British Navy. However, because the War Department would not divulge were any ships were they had their propaganda broadcaster and the newspapers claim the target was the Forth Rail Bridge.

      Hitler, though, had bitten off rather more than he could chew. Here is a brief account of the raid. The River Forth had anti-aircraft gun emplacements on both shores of the Forth and on every island in the firth. Not to mention right across the old Rail Bridge. Not only that but every ship in the dockyard and at Port Edgar was fully armed.

      Not to mention that The City of Edinburgh Spitfire Squadron was based at Turnhouse and the City of Glasgow Spitfire Squadron was based at Drem in East Lothian.

      To add to the German woes there was a large flotilla of destroyers, frigates and corvettes sailing up the Forth, returning from escort duty and everything opened up at the enemy.

      The Leading ship in the convoy was HMS Mohawk skippered by Captain Frank Jolly:-

      To cut a long story short a German bomber dropped a stick of bombs that straddled the bows of the Mohawk, instantly killing 15 men of the berthing party on the foredeck. However, the Mohawk is credited with downing several aircraft and later Captain Jolly brought his ship into Rosyth’s South Arm and made the ship fast.

      When the Mohawk bridge party turned to their skipper they found him sitting on the open bridge in a pool of his own blood. He was rushed onto a fleet ferry and taken to the naval hospital at Port Edgar but died of his injuries.

      By the way, I worked on HMS Mohawk in the 1950s when she refitted at Rosyth. Rosyth has more than enough room and would not be too hard to return to a major naval Base and dockyard. Incidentally the main Floating Dock on the Clyde was taken to the Clyde from Rosyth.

    148. ronnie anderson says:

      Dr Jim

    149. Macart says:

      @Robert Peffers

      Well aware that we wouldn’t be a new state Robert, but so far as the UN, EU/EFTA and/or NATO would be concerned, we’d be a new member state. Had intended to add the word member in the initial post but had hit submit before reading. (shrugs)

      As for the rUK bit? Just repeating the phrase used in the article tbh.

    150. ronnie anderson says:

      Dr Jim I noticed your post last night David McGuinness & myself were explaining the meaning of Salvo jure to Wee Scribble’s yesterday .

    151. schrodingers cat says:

      re rosyth

      it would also be useful to have a container port on our east coast as well

    152. Orri says:

      Is it bad that I thought Mandarin referred to Trump?

    153. Rock says:

      “We’ll be honest, folks, we’re having a lot of trouble understanding the people who want Scotland to be independent, but also want to keep Trident, but would turn their noses up at being paid £5bn a year for it”

      Rock (13th January – “The House Scot and the Field Scot”):

      “The most stupid people on earth are in Scotland.

      That does not mean all people in Scotland are stupid.

      It just means that if you were looking for the most stupid people on earth, Scotland would beat any other nation on earth.”

    154. Meg merrilees says:

      Dan Huil

      So Ruth Davidson has only retweeted Annie Wells condemnation of the OO behaviour in Glasgow yesterday evening – pity she couldn’t use her own words —ah but that might rock the boat with Arlene

      The marchers obviously didn’t hear darling Arlene’s speech last week about the OO not having any sectarian or bigoted origin…

      BBC now saying that a British Citizen has been murdered by Novichok nerve agent, PROBABLY made in Russia.

      My condolences to the women’s 3 children.

      Probably made in Porton Down might be more accurate?

      4 children out for the caves in Thailand –

      and still all we hear on R4, 10pm news is a discussion of Brexit.

    155. Orri says:

      Faslane isn’t coastal. Unless they grab the entire Clyde and more any vessels will pass through the internal waters of a sovereign territory. Not the coastal waters or EEZ where they might have free passage but inside the land itself.

    156. Rock says:

      Lochside says:
      8 July, 2018 at 6:09 pm

      “So 80% want to take bribes or let the Brits keep their nuclear warheads on our soil?…I really wonder if our population have any guts left or only think in terms of money when Indy is mentioned.”

      Scots will never vote for independence as a matter of principle.

      The majority has no principles on the matter it is either too stupid or too selfish.

      Rock (24th July 2015 – The unpayable ransom):

      “Scotland really has some of the most stupid and pathetic people on the planet.

      Has any other country in the world rejected independence?

      It was a no brainer for even the poorest people in Africa to fight for independence.

      We were offered it on a golden plate and a majority refused.”

    157. yesindyref2 says:

      @mike cassidy
      Already done, didn’t see it till last night, was busy last week.

      I’m actually pleased to see a half sensible defence posting from the opposition, ignoring the politics, rather than the usual “Salmond in a rowing boat with an air rifle” rubbish.

    158. ben madigan says:

      re Alba Woman’s friend’s incident with the orange order parade

      The same sorta thing happened years ago to me as a student in Belfast.
      I was beaten by men with big sticks for “crossing” an empty side street with no sign of a contingent or band from one end to the other. But one had already walked down the street and others would be coming.
      I complained to the police and was laughed out of the station.
      My father just said “didn’t you know not to cross?That’s a lesson for ye”

      I have never understood, and never will, by what right the OO monopolise our streets and city centres whenever they feel like it nor why all civic authorities seem powerless/too intimidated to stop them

    159. Southern Rock says:

      This Brexit debacle is holding up IndyRef2.

      We have to sit and wait for Brexit to play it’s self out.

      I personally think that the Tories are preparing for a Hard Brexit and will leave the EU on 29th March next year.

      There is just no way the EU will accept Treeza’s latest plan.

      Get ready for Nicola to announce a snap IndyRef2 for next Spring.

    160. Southern Rock says:

      Will England now go to war with Russia over this woman dying?

      Or will they find that the woman involved had other health issues before she touched the poison?

    161. Dek says:

      This thread is a depressing read for all but britnats who will be laughing their socks off.I have rarely seen such a deluge of fuckwittery. This isn’t folding Aces it’s kicking the table over and burning down the saloon.

    162. Alba Woman says:

      Ian B. The incident took place yesterday the 8 th

    163. Rock says:

      Southern Rock says:
      8 July, 2018 at 11:00 pm

      “Will England now go to war with Russia over this woman dying?”

      Rock (18th April – “Trampling on graves”):

      “The most disgraceful political thing that has happened to Scotland since it was sold 311 years ago has been the Scottish First Minister from an independence supporting party standing “shoulder to shoulder” with Saint Theresa and the “ghastly” Boris Johnson as they declared war on Russia after a false flag operation.

      Even the lame duck official UK opposition leader Corbyn had the guts to question the “evidence” without being afraid of being “crucified”.

      Anyone who thinks that the gutless Establishment lawyer Nicola will lead Scotland to independence is completely deluded, in my humble opinion.

      I don’t for one moment doubt her commitment to the independence cause, but Scotland will not get independence from England in a million years by playing according to Westminster rules.”

    164. Alba woman says:

      Ian B apologies should be 7th

    165. Don`t know if the UK PM will make a statement to Parliament tomorrow about the poor woman dying from exposure to a nerve agent close to chemical facility in Porton Down (for over 100 years England`s most secretive and controversial military research facility),

      but if she does and yet again without evidence blames Putin she must surely bring the England football team back to their country forthwith.

    166. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Alba woman –

      Thanks for that. Just wanted to clarify, in case it was a historical example.

      It’s utterly outrageous that any citizen of this country, let alone an 80-yr old, be treated like that.

      We’ve been saying ‘enough is enough’ for years. It has to come to a head sometime, and now’s as good a time as any.

    167. Alba woman says:

      Ian B. Apologies should be 7th

    168. CameronB Brodie says:

      Scot Finlayson
      Ouch. 🙂

    169. North chiel says:

      David Davis has resigned

    170. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      David Davis (Brexit secretary) has resigned.

      More to follow…


    171. Tackety Beets says:

      Davis resigned from Gvt .

    172. Thepnr says:

      FFS Rock!

      “Anyone who thinks that the gutless Establishment lawyer Nicola will lead Scotland to independence is completely deluded, in my humble opinion.”

      Establishment Lawyer? It was a job and a career she choose and it hardly looks like “establishment” to me.

      Following her graduation, Sturgeon completed her legal traineeship at McClure Naismith, a Glasgow firm of solicitors, in 1995. After qualifying as a solicitor, she worked for Bell & Craig, a firm of solicitors in Stirling, and later at the Drumchapel Law Centre in Glasgow from 1997 until her election to the Scottish Parliament in 1999.

      The Drumchapel Law & Money Advice Centre in Glasgow is set up purely to help the most disadvantaged people in our society yet you call that “establishment”. You’re an arsehole.

      Since 1987 Drumchapel Money Advice Centre (or DMAC as it is widely known) has been helping people with problems. Originally working only in the Drumchapel area, it now covers the West Glasgow area and is:

      A community controlled and registered charity
      3 projects
      Sees over 1,000 clients every year

      The 3 projects are:

      The Advocacy Project – Founded in 1993, it provides advocates for vulnerable adults, aged 18 and over, helping an individual to speak up for themselves.

      The Children’s Rights Project – Founded in 1998, for children and young people aged 5 – 18 years, the Project aims to give them a voice.

      The Money Advice Project – The Centre employs fully trained Money Advisors who provide advice and representation in money advice and welfare rights.

    173. Dr Jim says:

      Just in case there is anyone reading WOS tonight who thinks anything @Rock writes is in any way truthful or accurate or represents anything to do with the Independence movement in any way shape or form whatsoever the answer is no it doesn’t

      Nicola Sturgeon the First Minister of Scotland on the Skripal poisoning case, her actual words and not those made up by liars like @Rock or anybody else……

      NS Official announcement from Holyrood (Going on what I’ve been told) those six words preceeded the whole of the statement on Skripal

      For the incredibly hard of understanding or the selectively deaf those words mean exactly what she said they mean and that is The British security services informed Scotlands First Minister of their findings and she based her announcement upon that information, if that information was incorrect uninformed or otherwise it’s not in any way shape or form the responsibility or within the competence of Scotlands First Minister to order her own investigation into the validity of Britains secret services information

      In other words the First Minister of Scotland is NOT Jemima fucking Bond

    174. Thepnr says:

      @North chiel says:
      8 July, 2018 at 11:40 pm

      “David Davis has resigned”

      That could be it, expect a revolt on the Tory backbenches in parliament. A new Prime Minister and another General Election.

    175. K1 says:

      Can anyone put up a link about Davis resigning…ta

    176. Thepnr says:


      Here you go.

    177. K1 says:

      Cheers Thpnr…well he was threatening to do it last week or so it’s no great shock…but…who will replace him?

      JRM…hahaha…bring it on

    178. Thepnr says:


      There’s not much meat to put on the bones just yet, here’s the London Standard, won’t archive.

    179. Robert Peffers says:

      @Thepnr says: 8 July, 2018 at 8:52 pm:

      ” … General election must be held if Tory plotters oust Theresa May, British public say in poll”

      The general UK public cam say what it likes but that doesn’t make it legally inevitable, Thepnr.

      Westminster uses English Law except for Scotland, (but only if it can get away with it in Scotland’s case.

      Under English law, and that applies to the three Kingdom of England countries, the Queen of England is legally sovereign and the Prime Minister is legally, “Her Majesty’s Prime Minister of Her Majesty’s Government of her Majesty’s United Kingdom.

      When there has been an election the Queen calls in the leader of the largest political party and commands that leader to form Her Majesty’s Government. n 1688 Queen Mary & King Billy were made to legally delegate the Parliament of England to exercise their Majesty’s sovereignty.

      None of this is legal under Scots law but it hasn’t stopped Westminster from acing as if it did. Which is why it has never been tested in either Scottish or English courts. Westminster just acts as if it were sovereign over Scots and Scotland but there is nothing to say that it is but lots to say that it doesn’t and Scottish courts have ruled that the concept as in English Law has no place under Scots law and Westminster just ignores it.

      So it you believe that this particularly arrogant Westminster Parliament are going to give fu…. (Err! Fig for an opinion poll yer dafter than I thought you were.Once “don’t knows” were removed, the majority for an immediate election soared to 63 per cent against 37 per cent who believed the new leader could continue without a fresh mandate from the public.

    180. Macart says:


      Not unexpected tbh. 😉

    181. call me dave says:

      Has there ever been another more incompetent, lying, unprepared set of selfish barstewards charged with running the UK than this present lot?

      Wouldn’t surprise me if they called in Sturgeon for some advice 🙂

      What do they say “Anything can happen next” FGS!

    182. Hamish100 says:


      GET TAE YOUR BED Its past yir bedtime and stop sooking yir thumb

    183. Thepnr says:


      No not really, something had to give.

      Next up more resignations, Johnson, Fox and Leadsom probably the weasel Gove will cling on with his teeth and Rees-Mogg will be busy gathering 48 letters to send to the 1922 committee demanding a leadership challenge.

      All just guesses of course but I’m laughing like fcuk 🙂

    184. Meg merrilees says:

      Excrement has hit the fan!

      Expect anything now- and all overshadowed by Novichok, Wimbledon and the World Cup.

      Amazed we actually heard about Davis resigning.

      SO, all out for a GE and a vote for the SNP is a vote for Independence?

    185. Tackety Beets says:

      Dominoes, Baker gone too.

      Im listening LBC , Ian Dale a pal o Davis.

    186. Thepnr says:

      @Tackety Beets

      Just keeps getting better, utter chaos! hahahaha 🙂

    187. K1 says:

      Whose Baker again?

    188. Macart says:


      Personally,I’d break out the popcorn for the next few weeks. Should be quite the entertainment. 🙂

    189. Tackety Beets says:


      Incredible, considering Radio Shortbread this AM discussing “Sturgeon under pressure to back TM” etc

      “Boris J will resign by noon tomorrow” has just been quoted.

    190. Thepnr says:

      From ITV

      Brexiteer Tory MP Peter Bone supported David Davis’ decision to quit.

      “David Davis has done the right thing, a principled and brave decision,” he said on Twitter.

      “The PM’s proposals for a Brexit in name only are not acceptable.”

      Mr Davis’ exit may embolden Brexiteer backbenchers with concerns about Mrs May’s leadership.

      Labour MP Seema Malhotra, who sits on the Commons Brexit Select Committee, tweeted: “Will there be a domino effect?

      “It’s now not inconceivable that May is gone within days or weeks, the Tories are plunged into disarray and a general election called.”

    191. msdidi says:

      Brexit Dept Minister…..David Davis’s No2

    192. Thepnr says:


      He’s Steven Baker, Under Secretary of State at the Department for Exiting the EU and Davis’s second in command.

      The rats are deserting the sinking ship. Man the lifeboats!

    193. Ghillie says:

      There is no amount of money that can ever compensate for keeping nuclear weapons of mass destruction in Scotland.

      I want them taken away now.

      Disarmed and never replaced anywhere.

    194. Arbroath1320 says:

      So now that David “four hours” Davis and his sidekick Steven Baker have resigned will someone be running a bingo card on those who will resign? 😀

    195. Orri says:

      A more cheery interpretation would be that just over 50% want Trident gone as quick as possible. Some want to add a bit of incentive so the rUK doesn’t piss about.

      Not sure the 48 letters have to come all at once. What I heard was that the tally was rising and May knew that too. There might be a rule about letters lapsing. Obviously you ensure that there are no shenanigans where letters are discounted or outright ignored by sending them at the same time

    196. Robert Peffers says:

      @Bill says: 8 July, 2018 at 2:54 pm:

      “NATO rules: weapons delivery platform, the boat, should not be more than one hour by sea to the loading facility. Hence the neatness of Coulport and Faslane locations.”

      Who in Scotland gives a damn where the Kingdom Of England cares to stick it – it will be no concerns of Scotland or Scots.

      As to knowledge of Nuclear Submarines and Nuclear Weapons I worked on the very first nuclear powered vessel and every one thereafter until I retired, and Bill, I wasn’t the tea laddie.

      I did a spell on the weapons systems, another in the instrument shop, Radio, Radar, Sonar, Electronics and the RADIAC Lab. I was involved in refuelling, including CCTV and remote handling equipment used in refuelling reactors.

      So please don’t attempt to teach your grandfathers to suck Eggs.

    197. Ian Mackay says:

      Brexit Minister David Davis quits.

      Junior Brexit Minister also Steve Baker quits.

      And now another Junior Brexit Minister Suella Braverman quits.

      Leaves only one Junior Brexit Minister left running the Department for Exiting the European Union: Robin Walker – and he was a Remainer.

    198. Ghillie says:

      Following the Chequers’ madhatter’s tea party, somebody (cannot mind who) commented that the wannabe Hard Brexiteers would not now choose that moment to resign or walkout because they knew the impending Sweden vs England football match would steal their thunder 🙂

      But to watch, that by Monday all that could change.

    199. Meg merrilees says:

      Wonder what the 13 tractor Scottish Conservatives will do now – representing constituencies that voted to Remain, but have been ganging up on Treeza and presumably will not like this fudge Brexit.

      Colonel (t)Ruthless has already tweeted her support for Treeza and this latest Brexit position being good for Scotland.

    200. Robert Peffers says:

      @Bill says: 8 July, 2018 at 3:18 pm:

      ” … Kings Bay.
      It’s so monumentally crass that I don’t know where to begin.
      We have 4 boats: one on patrol, one in refit, another in dry dock and one in port. It’s the minimum number of boats to maintain CASD.”

      None too clever are you, Bill?

      That wee bit above says volumes – “We have 4 boats … “

      Who is this “We”, you speak about, Bill. I’m sure it isn’t … “We Scots”. Now let me think. who else could it be?

    201. K1 says:

      Thanks for the info. re Baker folks.

    202. Thepnr says:

      It really doesn’t matter one iota to the case for Scottsih Independence whether there is a General Election or not after these resignations (and surely more to come).

      All that matters is the sight and opening of peoples eyes to the utter shambles and chaos of a Government we have leading us now from Westminster. A Government that Scotland had once again rejected at the last election as well as most in the last 70 years.

      This shambles will at least have people talking who might normally never talk politics, GE or not it’s an opportunity to put the positive case for an Independent Scotland and we must take advantage of it.

      So get aff yer arses and get out there, the coming weeks will be interesting and potentially lucrative to our cause.

    203. Ian Brotherhood says:

      We deserve to enjoy this Tory meltdown.

      These are the bastards who have systematically ground us down for decades, nay centuries.

      Hell mend them, and all who support them.

    204. CameronB Brodie says:

      The wheels are finally coming off. Just goes to show that pragmatism without ethics is simply clown-shoes fascism. Not that I didn’t foresee this thirty years ago.

      How Democracies Die

      “Comprehensive, enlightening, and terrifyingly timely.”
      —New York Times Book Review

      “Cool and persuasive… How Democracies Die comes at exactly the right moment.”
      —The Washington Post

      Donald Trump’s presidency has raised a question that many of us never thought we’d be asking: Is our democracy in danger? Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt have spent more than twenty years studying the breakdown of democracies in Europe and Latin America, and they believe the answer is yes. Democracy no longer ends with a bang—in a revolution or military coup—but with a whimper: the slow, steady weakening of critical institutions, such as the judiciary and the press, and the gradual erosion of long-standing political norms. The good news is that there are several exit ramps on the road to authoritarianism. The bad news is that, by electing Trump, we have already passed the first one.

      Drawing on decades of research and a wide range of historical and global examples, from 1930s Europe to contemporary Hungary, Turkey, and Venezuela, to the American South during Jim Crow, Levitsky and Ziblatt show how democracies die—and how ours can be saved.

    205. Thepnr says:

      Chris Cairns on Twitter with an old cartoon of his of David Davis as Benny Hill is a great laugh as I really like Benny Hill.

    206. K1 says:

      I agree, we have to enjoy this…it was inevitable that they would completely screw up and have a complete party meltdown…it’s a wunner it’s gone this far before a bunch of Tory hard right tossers finally did a mini me of UKexit.

      I’m calling it…


    207. Robert Peffers says:

      @Bill says: 8 July, 2018 at 3:25 pm:

      “What then?

      An appeal to the World Court at the Hague, an appeal to the United Nations and, just perhaps, a bit of persuasion with retaliatory action like cutting off the electricity, oil, gas and water supplies and the many other things needed for the base to survive but also that which presently crosses the borders into both England and Northern Ireland.

      Never forget, Bill that when the Kingdom of England exit the EU and Scotland is Independent there will be a great many territorial waters and air space closed to an England that is acting with hostility towards her near neighbours.

      I can think of a certain country that has attempted to close its borders and not co-operate with its neighbours – (that is until recently). Now as it is really feeling the pinch and now – North Korea that tried isolationism and is now having to change its tune.

      Not to mention the customs and excise that is presently gained by Westminster as it counts all Scottish exports that leave the United Kingdom via English ports and airports as being English Exports. It is going to have to pay the price after independence.

      And, (cough!), if all that fails then we ask Alex Salmond to get his great pals in Russia to come to Scotland’s assistance.

    208. Chick McGregor says:

      So what are May’s options now?

      Appoint a new Brexit negotiating team? Secondary question, Brexiteers or remainers?

      Take Brexit under cabinet control?

      General election?

      Face leadership challenge, Boris? Jacob? Angela?

      EU options, bite bottom lip to avoid laughing until you can get to a rest room.

    209. Liz g says:

      Is the BBC struggling to come up with how to report his resignation.?
      This may be getting more enjoyable than we first thought!!!

    210. Thepnr says:


      I think that’s just the start of it and there will likely be a few more resignations tomorrow. I doubt David Davis made this decision by himself.

      May could be toast now and then who knows, looks all good to me.

    211. Robert Peffers says:

      @Andy in Germany says:8 July, 2018 at 3:59 pm:

      ” … and although Scotland has some aces, WM will still control the military in Scotland, which is arguably the ultimate ace up their sleeve.”

      Oh! No they bloody well won’t.

      ” … If Scotland charged too much for Faslane or demanded Trident be removed immediately, WM could simply garrison the base and occupy a large chunk of Scotland to boot.”

      Of course the UN and EU and even some members of NATO might have something to say about that.

    212. Greannach says:

      Who will follow Davis into even greater obscurity?
      Fox? He likes the holidays abroad with Adam too much.
      Johnson? He likes the ministerial car and being in places Winston Churchill frequented.
      Gove? NHe isn’t really anybody any more.

      Looks like Davis is on his own. Again.

    213. cearc says:

      ‘Strong and Stable’.

    214. Macart says:

      @Chic McGregor

      They’re in a pickle Chic and no mistake. The next week should prove a bit on the eventful side. LOL 😀

    215. Liz g says:

      Robert Peffers @ 1.36
      As would the people of Scotland Robert….
      As has already been pointed out this is not a costal Base, the logistics demand the cooperation of Holyrood.
      There’s no way of keeping this Base supplied unless the Scottish Government agreed to it.
      I’d wager there’s also a direct fuel pipe from Grangemouth to the Base just like one to the airport.
      This pipe (if it indeed exists, the airport one certainly does) would be on ground controlled by the Scottish Government…. so they canAnnex away…. till the petrol runs out!
      The difference between Faslane and Cypress and the other foreign bases is an air strip!

    216. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Farewell, reluctant conscript.

    217. Dr Jim says:

      *They’ll garrison the base* Ho Ho deary me I think your thinking of Roman times or something
      Garrison? that’s a cracker, A wee bit of the ex empire military indoctrination possibly?

      In Brexit news Jacob Rees Mogg now controls 60 Tory hard Brexit leaver MPs and I’m sure his Nanny is dialling more numbers for him as we speak, Arise Sir Jacob Prime Minister of well, what’s left of England

      It’s all Jack in the box fun now, cannae wait tae get up in the morning now

    218. Roger says:

      I’m not really serious here, but the thought did cross my mind that now would be an EXCELLENT time for Holyrood to declare independence (but say at the same time that they are delaying implementing it for 5 years so as to sort out the details). London and Mrs Teapot’s government are in such disarray that they probably wouldn’t even notice for a week or so – and then probably wouldn’t be able to come up with a coherent reaction till after the next election,,,

    219. Douglas Guy says:

      I wonder how much Russia would pay to lease part of Prestwick airport to host the 25th Independent Anti-submarine Helicopter Regiment. Options, just sayin’.

    220. Anon says:

      “Bill says:
      8 July, 2018 at 3:50 pm

      Commanchio unit would eat you for breakfast.”

      Comacchio Group was replaced by FPGRM nearly 20 yrs ago. 43 Commando FPG now.

    221. yesindyref2 says:

      Just been catching up with some previous nonsense posted by a certain someone who says people have said what they haven’t said. And as for Kings Bay, it’s an option considered by defence experts from RUSI (if he knows who it is / they are), and this paper was August 2014, 2 years after Chalmers first wrote about the “problem” of Scottish Independence. Chalmers is very highly respected, his view on Kings Bay (in the US) is this:

      However, basing in the US is not a credible long-term option. One of the primary purposes of the UK nuclear force is to provide some insurance against a scenario where, for whatever reason, the US is not willing to come to the UK’s defence against a nuclear threat. A decision to rely on a US operating base would clearly undermine the credibility of the UK nuclear force in this scenario.

      Note the “long-term” implying short-term is practical in some ways, and the reason has nothing to do with crews and crew rotations, or boat rotation. Though in fairness there is suppsoed to be a recruitment problem, and such foreign basing wouldn’t make it easier, though to many I understand from what you could call ‘netscuttlebut, Faslane is quite foreign enough for many.

      This bit about NPT is interesting:

      Furthermore, both parties’ membership of the NPT would complicate the shared use of a nuclear base. The NPT bans nuclear-armed states from directly or indirectly transferring control of nuclear weapons to any recipient.

      As such, any capacity to load and unload UK nuclear warheads in the US would have to convincingly isolate those warheads from US control in order to avoid raising serious questions in relation to the NPT compliance of both states

      Interestingly, I think RUSI is homed in the area Scottish kings stayed when they went down to London to “pay homage”.

    222. robertknight says:

      Daisy May’s latest batch of fudge looks set to go straight into the EU’s waste bin.

      The FT article by Delphine Strauss, (July 5, 2018)…

      “Could the UK negotiate access to the single market for goods only? Perhaps.

      A deal along these lines would meet the pledges both sides have made to prevent a hard border in the island of Ireland. It would also avoid disruption at borders more generally and could dissuade big manufacturers from moving elsewhere in the EU.

      But the EU denounces any such arrangement as cherry-picking — attempting to retain the advantages of single market membership without accepting the corresponding obligations on free movement. Brussels also argues that trade in goods cannot practically be separated from services: the example of truck drivers shifting freight from one country to another is a case in point.

      Indeed, Jean-Claude Piris, former head of the EU legal service, has described the idea of a single market for goods only as “delusionary”. However, it could be a good deal for the EU, which sells more goods to the UK than vice versa and could continue to do so, while restricting access for the UK’s services providers.

      For the proposal to be taken seriously, though, Mrs May would have to make substantial concessions on money and sovereignty. The UK would have to abide by EU product regulation, and guarantee not to undercut EU rules on competition, social policy and the environment.

      It would probably also need to make a budget contribution and either accept ECJ oversight, or agree on a new extraterritorial mechanism to resolve legal disputes.”

      No wonder DD threw the toys out the pram!

    223. yesindyref2 says:

      Chalmers started by the way, in 2012 when the Indy Ref was first announced as going to happen, with a paper that was very UK-centric, which is fine in one way as that’s his priority and job, but was also very UK-centric in his reasoning, and dismissive of Scotland. Almost imperial you could say. It badly coloured his thinking, and would make you gnash your teeth and rage aginst the universe and all that – it did me anyway. It’s 42 you diddy.

      But by August 2014 he was to put it bluntly, much better informed and had clearly considered factors and intrinsic capabilities a lot better. Hence why that paper is worth consideration in a serious way.

      I think he’s pretty genuine, like many he started with that instituional bias, but was able to get past it. Many still can’t.

    224. yesindyref2 says:


      (quoting FT) “or agree on a new extraterritorial mechanism to resolve legal disputes

      To be perfectly honest I suspect the Brexiteers are more likely to accept an extraterrestrial mechanism, in fact it’s quite likely some have already been body swapped, including the possible new Brexit guy, Gove, he of the similarity to a fishbone scraping over the remains of a dog’s fishy breakfast.

    225. Ken500 says:

      Another one hits the dust. Another one gone, another one down. Another one hits the dust. What a total mucked up mess. The usual Tory saga. Psycho bastards.

      The only way they are going to get out of this is to have a GE and lose. The usual caper. What a shower. Along with the Labour/LibDem enablers.

      How long can this farce go on. The Westminster unionists ruining the economy. Sanctioning and starving people. How low can they go. Just unbelievable, Thank goodness for the SNP Gov in Holyrood and the continuing support for Independence.

      What a complete and utter Westminster shambles. Pathetic and nonsensical. Lie, after lie, after lie.

    226. Bill Hume says:

      I agree Ken, that the only way out for the Tory party is to have a GE and lose.

      I have my doubts however, that the Tory party has the ability to lose.

      We have a Labour party still trailing in the polls and who are also commited to Brexit.

      This is a democracy where the opposition does not OPPOSE the biggest crisis in this country for 50 years

    227. Ken500 says:

      Throughout this mess. Cameron in the sun at Wimbledon. Milking the British/Chinese consortium. The Tory over priced slush fund. For fee, consultation, bank charges and remuneration. The illegal troughers. Milking the public purse. Brexit. The Hedge Fund and electoral crime. Most of them should be in jail.

      Cameron should be watching from a prison cell. Responsible for sanctioning and starving people. Starving the NHS/Education of cash. Cheating and lying at every turn. Wasting public money like there is no tomorrow. Hinkley Point, HS2 and Trident, wasted £Billions. Welfare cuts the cruelest cuts of all. Tax breaks and cuts for the wealthiest while people starve. The tax Laws not enforced,

      Illegal wars, financial fraud and tax evasion. Brexit. The Westminster unionist vile bile. Contemptible. Government fraud. Rewards for failure.

    228. Mountain shadow says:

      When your Brexit Secretary resigns a day after your Brexit strategy is apparently agreed, then I feel it’s time to prepare for another general election.

    229. admiral says:

      Mountain shadow says:
      9 July, 2018 at 7:51 am
      When your Brexit Secretary resigns a day after your Brexit strategy is apparently agreed, then I feel it’s time to prepare for another general election.

      Bozo or Gove next, with Jacob Rees-Smug getting ready to knife Mrs Strong and Stable in the back?

    230. louis.b.argyll says:

      Ooh, a hastily worded SNP badness report about some mental health staff working outside best practice, turned into system failure, BUT ITS ALL JUST A TRAILER FOR A DOCUMENTARY, TONIGHT 830 ON BBC SCOT.

    231. Ken500 says:

      Who wants the poisoned chalice?

    232. Bill Hume says:

      The weather is nice, the English people are obsessing over 11 men kicking an inflated sphere about on a bit of grass, the Tory party is in meltdown and the Labour party are in total disarray.
      Brexit is about to bite the whole of the UK in the bum and I could not be happier.

      Snap GE…..bring it on.

      Gird your loins fellow Wingers. We may need to hit the streets very soon now and get all those soft no’s converted to deffo Yessers.

    233. Thepnr says:

      Strong and Stable! Strong and Stable! Strong and Stable! My arse.

      Rain has just come on but it’s a lovely day none the less 🙂

    234. Brian Powell says:

      Problem for another pointless election would be that Labour would need to say what it is actually going to do.

      Though people in panic, when the political exits are blocked and on fire, do crazy things like vote LibDem or think Corbyn’s plan of nationalising the railways is the answer to Brexit.

      I suspect England and consequentially us could end up with a catastrophic fudge that makes May’s fudge look like the Tablets on the Mount.

    235. Thepnr says:

      What Nicola Sturgeon thinks of Davis’s resignation hahaha.

    236. Bill Hume says:

      I agree with you Brian Powell @8.21 am.
      To me, it all looks good.

    237. wull2 says:

      I have said this for the last two years, it will go down in history as Labour who took GB out of the EU, lost NI and Scotland.

    238. Ken500 says:

      It was the Tories who called an EU Referendum and told lies to try and win an election. Cheated and committed electoral fraud. The LibDem/Labour enablers colluding with the Tories at every turn. No opposition.

      Vote SNP/SNP Vote for Independence. For democracy, fairness and prosperity.

    239. Highland Wifie says:

      So I have a while off from posting cos tbh I haven’t got much to say that others can’t express much more eloquently. I have an early night to get my beauty sleep (ha ha) and I wake up this morning to find that DD has resigned.
      Can this get any more farcical?
      And I’ve run out of popcorn! Aargh.

    240. galamcennalath says:

      Ken500 says:

      It was the Tories who called an EU Referendum

      … and it was the way Cameron did so which has put us all in this mess.

      He negotiated a mildly changed relationship with the EU. That SHOULD have been tested against the status quo. Referendums only work, or are only valid even, if they test a proposition for change versus no change.

      Cameron called for a little change versus lots of change. The problem was, the lots of change option had no manifesto, no planning, no detail.

      What SHOULD have happened is an EURef which tested a documented and well thought through Leave proposal versus the Remain status quo.

      Cameron had form. IndyRef1 was supposed to be a well documented Indy versus status quo. To win, Cameron changed that into Indy versus DevoMax. There was no manifesto or clear definition of DevoMax. And where has that led!?

      Twice Cameron has torpedoed referendums by enabling a woolly undefined proposition to win.

    241. Highland Wifie says:

      @CameronB Brodie
      Thanks for link about ‘How Democracies Die’. Definitely looks worth a read.

    242. Ken500 says:

      Cameron is a crook. A cheating lying crook. Along with the rest of them. Psycho bastards on the way out. The total mess. UK can’t afford to leave the EU. The worst migration crisis in Europe since the 11WW was caused by U.K./US and France. Illegal actions under International Law. The Westminster unionists caused it. Costing £Trns. Destabilising the world economy. The Westminster unionist caused it.

    243. Proud Cybernat says:

      Serial media dodger (when it suits), Rooth the Mooth Davidson, demands that Scotland’s First Minister gets behind the Maybot’s Chequers Brexit plan.

      If the UK’s Minister for Leaving the EU, David Davis, cannot even get behind Mayhem’s plan, how the hell does Roofie expect the FM to?


    244. schrodingers cat says:

      the only means of having frictionless trade is to be in the SM and the CU, which have both been ruled out by both treeza and corbyn. as such, there really isnt anything to talk about as far as the eu are concerned.

      there are only 2 options, out of cu/sm, except ni and a transitional period or no deal. we crash out to wto next march.

      no one wants to be carrying the can when either of those 2 options happen so treeza will need to go to brussels next week alone to have this confirmed.

      then the cows will come home to roost 🙂

      ge in the autumn folks

    245. Shug says:

      Bbc call kaye this morning just presented a non stop run of unionist pro brexit callers. It is impossible to believe the bbc did not line them up.
      Not a word about farmers and fishermen losing eu subsidies and markets. Who will buy their product when they face a 40% surcharge

    246. auld highlander says:

      What a circus, the ringmaster running around around like a headless chicken as the main performer buggers off, weak and wobbly for sure, the laughingstock of the uk and Europe.

      As for the nukes, get rid but overcharge the owners for use of the facilities until they are removed.

    247. Robert Peffers says:

      @Macart says: 8 July, 2018 at 10:03 pm:

      ” … Well aware that we wouldn’t be a new state Robert, but so far as the UN, EU/EFTA and/or NATO would be concerned, we’d be a new member state.”

      Not actually strictly true, Macart. In all cases, (EU in particular), there is one wee thorny problem. It is that the United Kingdom is neither a unified country nor is it a unified kingdom. It remains as it always has been – a legally agreed union of only two, equally sovereign, kingdoms.

      It is only the Westminster spin, (a.k.a. lies) that projects it to the World at large as, variously, a single unified country, a single unified kingdom or a single unified political state. It is none of these things and it never has been. Yet Westminster still claims it is any one of the false options when it suits Westminster’s benefit to portray the United Kingdom as whatever suits Westminster’s purpose.

      It is more akin to the legal marriage of two individual human beings. Two such humans getting married has two distinct corollaries. They both become legally married and they both remain individuals. They do not become one person. They may, or may not, be of the same sex. They are two individuals who agree to be legally a couple.

      The United Kingdom,in spite of how Westminster projects the matter, remains legally two individual kingdoms who agreed to legally become a couple in a partnership and, in practice, couples do decide to separate, sometimes even still leading separate independent lives, in the same house, while still legally married.

      So here’s the thing – when the United Kingdom’s two partners split up – which one legally becomes, or remains, legally the home owner? a.k.a. which kingdom of two legally equally sovereign kingdoms owns the title, “The United Kingdom”, when the two partners legally split up?

      The United Kingdom is the Member state but if the United Kingdom has split up, and thus no longer exists, which of the two partner kingdoms is legally the member state of any organisation the united kingdoms joined while together?

      I hope that explains what I’ve been getting at all those years since I was a wee Schoolboy running around what had been the two separate entities, Edinburgh & Leith but had become all Edinburgh when it took over Leith:-

      Historical Note: The medieval settlements of Leith had grown into a burgh by 1833. The burgh of Leith was merged into Edinburgh in 1920, (In my boyhood the people of Leith still mostly regarded themselves as Leithers rather than Edinburgers).

    248. Dr Jim says:

      Radio Scotland fills the airwaves with phone calls from people who couldn’t understand the sequence of traffic lights
      to comment on the workings of the European Union then lets them talk to one another clearly demonstrating that most of the people who phone in to radio programmes are in fact a particular set of people who shouldn’t be allowed a phone in the first place let alone a vote

      *Ah don’t know whit tae dae aboot it but we cannae be Independent but we hiv tae dae sumthin*

      The only political party that has called this right every step of the way has been Scotlands National Party yet this is the party most of these callers DON’T want because each and every one of them thinks their own country is NOT a country and even though they all recognise the English government party (which they DO want to keep in charge) couldnae spread jam without assistance they still REFUSE to accept the party (SNP) who can not only spread the jam but gae them a free cup of tea along with it

      You know when this all goes sandshoes up guess who they’ll blame …no postcards please

    249. HandandShrimp says:

      In some ways Davis has muddied the waters considerably. May seems to be offering an olive branch to Labour to get her proposals through. If we end up in some sort of EEA solution it will undermine the foundation for Indyref2.

      Of course the EU might reject May’s proposals. The Tories might revolt and try and topple May. Corbyn’s Brexit instincts might result in Labour abstaining or voting against May.

      At this point there are are a lot of cards on the table and it is not clear who is holding what.

    250. Breeks says:

      Worth remembering… the division in May’s Government is between hard Brexiteers who want No Deal, and hard Brexiteers who want a token deal to soften the blow of a hard Brexit.

      The dispute in strategy is not survival instincts kicking in to escape disaster and save the economy by actually rethinking Brexit, but an insular Conservative Party dispute between hard Brexiteers and hard Brexiteer extremists, cocooned with a Tory – Labour Westminster dispute between hard Brexiteers and clueless hard Brexiteers.

      Not withstanding the SNP at Westminster, nobody is providing the “sane” option of UK’s Remain vote with effective political representation.

      Scotland’s Remain majority inside the context of the UK is merely a voice crying in the wilderness. If we Scots desire to stay in Europe, or even exit Europe but do it with a constructive alternative arrangement, then Government by Westminster has absolutely nothing to offer Scotland.

      The division in opinion about Europe is, in Scotland, is a line between those who think Brexit is a catastrophic idea, and those who think it makes sense. Without necessarily judging whether one side is right and the other side is wrong, it is a logical and reasoned dispute between an argument and it’s logical counter argument.

      All Westminster / UK politics can deliver however is a dispute between unqualified catastrophe and qualified catastrophe. There is no counterbalance in the dispute.

      It is the equivalent of playing Russian Roulette. In Scotland the dispute is whether we should pull the trigger or whether we don’t. In South Britain, the dispute is not about pulling the trigger but whether they should hold the gun to the temple or in the mouth when they do.

      Scotland must exit the United Kingdom or be subjugated within it to the extent that Scotland must forfeit its economy and interests to ruination if ever, and whenever, it is commanded to do so by lunatics. For as long as a hundred of us remain alive, this is unacceptable.

    251. Ellie says:

      I’d use money to force them out as quickly as possible:

      1st year after Independence £5 billion per year to host trident
      2nd – 5th years after independence £10 billion per year to host trident
      6th – 10th year after independence £25 billion per year to host trident
      11+ years after independence £50 billion per year to host trident

    252. ronnie anderson says:

      Just in case this hasn’t been posted before .

    253. schrodingers cat says:

      HandandShrimp says:
      If we end up in some sort of EEA solution…

      this is the problem, there is no such thing as “some sort” of eea deal, anymore than there is a jobs first brexit, a good deal or being a little bit pregnant. treeza has stated time and again, the uk is leaving the sm and cu. by definition this excludes eea/efta or a norway deal. indeed, the entire eu negotiating position is based on the understanding that the uk is leaving the sm and cu.

      it is cakism to suggest that there is some other means, a 3rd way, of having frictionless trade while being out of the sm/cu.

      there isnt

    254. schrodingers cat says:

      HandandShrimp says:
      At this point there are are a lot of cards on the table and it is not clear who is holding what.
      I think you will find it is the eu who is holding all the aces

    255. HandandShrimp says:

      It’s OK, she appointed Raab. The car crash is still on. 🙂

    256. schrodingers cat says:

      the tories have a handful of old maids and corbyn is clutching on for dear life to Mr Bun the baker

    257. Macart says:


      Oh ye gods! Raab?

      Popcorn sales will go through the roof.

    258. Jack Murphy says:

      BREXIT and right-wing Melanie Phillips who is never off the Telly and BBC Question Time seems to have gone too far today.
      Columnist on The Times and formerly of The Daily Mail.


      ” I’ve said it before:
      draft Farage.
      Sack May,
      give Farage a peerage, make him party leader and PM
      – at least until UK really does properly leave the EU.

      Too fanciful? Desperate times need desperate measures; public faith in democratic process now in danger ”

      This nonsense from the same person who said on American TV that,”The Scots really hate the English”. 🙁

      What do the Tory MPs from Scottish constituencies think I wonder.

    259. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Why wouldn’t we tell them to GTF on Indy day and make all the necessary arrangements for them to load up and move out asap?”

      Because it isn’t what most of the population want, and £5bn a year is really useful?

    260. gus1940 says:

      Liz G @ 1.57.

      There is a pipeline but it runs from Grangemouth to Finnart on Loch Long.

      It was built in the days before N. Sea Oil was discovered and was used for tankers to discharge their oil and send it along the pipeline to Grangemouth.

      Latterly the oil ran in the opposite direction and along with Hounds Point on the Forth Finnart was/is used as an oil export terminal.

      d asm a

    261. yesindyref2 says:

      Ah, just checked that 2014 Chalmers report again about relocation costs:

      An initial analysis of previous nuclear submarine infrastructure projects suggests that the gross costs of relocating the rUK’s nuclear forces to two separate sites in England could amount to between £3 billion and £4 billion (at 2012/13 prices), excluding any costs associated with land purchase and clearance. The net increase in infrastructure costs (excluding land purchase and clearance) created by relocation could be reduced to between £2.5 and £3.5 billion (at 2012/2013 prices) by the cancellation of planned investment to prepare Scotland for a successor submarine.

      Faslane is of course being upgraded now (thanks UK, we’ll need it!).

    262. Chick McGregor says:

      El Pais
      In an article on Davis’s resignation describes it as a another surprising twist in the tragi-comical soap opera played out by the protagonists of the British Government on Brexit negotiations and a source of perplexity for those on the other side of the channel.

      (Seemingly not available in the on line English version)

    263. Lochside says:

      Rev Stu…..
      You quoted me out of context:

      “Why wouldn’t we tell them to GTF on Indy day and make all the necessary arrangements for them to load up and move out asap?”

      Because it isn’t what most of the population want, and £5bn a year is really useful?…says you.

      I had already commented that 80% wanted to either keep it or take a stupid bribe…..I didn’t think you were part of that group.

    264. orri says:

      Tell them to GTF as soon as they can without any unfortunate “accidents” contaminating the base. If it takes more than a year to do so then charge them for it. Increasing the cost the longer they delay. At some point lower the boom and refuse them the right to carry nuclear warheads. Base will be accessible at all times to accredited Scottish and/or international inspectors either immediately or after the first year.

      I’m not certain they could fully vacate and decontaminate Faslane within a single year.

    265. gus1940 says:

      I’ve said it before – A few unfortunate ‘accidental’ shipwrecks at The Rhu Narrows would concentrate a few minds at WM.

    266. MZ says:

      At the end of the day it will be up to the Scottish people to decide, and that can only be good whether you support this view or not.

    267. Gary says:

      Can you imagine Westminster allowing this to happen?

      Scotland becomes independent without this issue having ALREADY been resolved?

      A ‘rental’ agreement, not made yet. No agreement to rent and no agreement on the amount to pay WERE it made?

      I see the rUK simply ‘retaining’ the base. Not far from where the base is there used to be an American base. How much ‘rent’ did we get from them? That might be more of an appropriate guideline as to how this would work.

      Of course, maybe they DID pay us an enormous sum of rent, I have no idea.

      But to be honest I thnk the gain we were supposed to get was via the servicemen themselves and what they contributed to the area. Which, in fact, turned out to be cheap booze n fags from the PX and widespread chlamydia in the local populace of my hometown…

    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