HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Independent Scotland woul...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:48 PM

Independent Scotland would ban nuclear weapons but join Nato

Source: Telegraph

Alex Salmond has promised SNP members a separate Scotland will have a written constitution banning nuclear weapons if they reverse their decades-long opposition to Nato.

The First Minister said the document would include a clause declaring weapons of mass destruction illegal, meaning the UK’s Trident submarine fleet would have to be moved from its base on the Clyde.

He made the pledge to placate his party members ahead of their conference later this month, at which they will vote to reverse SNP policy on an independent Scotland being part of Nato.

The Nationalists have opposed membership for years because the alliance is based on nuclear weapons, but this stance has severely undermined the credibility of their defence policy in the debate over separation.

Mr Salmond and Angus Robertson, his defence spokesman, are aiming to convince the SNP rank-and-file they can safely back Nato without compromising their anti-nuclear credentials or their determination to remove Trident.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/9592522/Independent-Scotland-would-ban-nuclear-weapons-but-join-Nato.html

15 replies, 3194 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 15 replies Author Time Post
Reply Independent Scotland would ban nuclear weapons but join Nato (Original post)
bananas Oct 2012 OP
Botany Oct 2012 #1
bananas Oct 2012 #2
Poll_Blind Oct 2012 #12
DissidentVoice Oct 2012 #3
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #4
Kolesar Oct 2012 #5
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #6
Kolesar Oct 2012 #7
krispos42 Oct 2012 #11
Kolesar Oct 2012 #15
PavePusher Oct 2012 #8
tkmorris Oct 2012 #10
PavePusher Oct 2012 #13
Ash_F Oct 2012 #9
pampango Oct 2012 #14

Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:59 PM

1. The Scots will defend their land w/ caber tosses

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #1)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:31 PM

2. A lot of people in Britain want to dump Trident

Even military people. It's outrageously expensive, the cold war ended a long time ago, it didn't deter attacks from Argentina, IRA, or Al Qaeda.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/26/trident-nuclear-missiles-review-downgrading


Trident submarine missiles review to suggest 'stepping down nuclear ladder'

Ousted defence minister Nick Harvey claims military and Whitehall backing for cheaper alternatives

Juliette Jowit and Patrick Wintour
The Guardian, Wednesday 26 September 2012 15.30 EDT

The government's review of the future of the Trident submarine nuclear missile system is likely to suggest a significant downgrading of the UK's nuclear deterrent, including the possibility of locking the warheads "in a cupboard" for delayed launch only after several weeks of mounting international tension.

The revelation was made by Sir Nick Harvey, the Liberal Democrat who was the defence minister leading the review until the government reshuffle this month. The MP for North Devon said he believed the policy could get support in Whitehall and from senior military figures and Labour.

Harvey said past policy on Trident had been dictated by the 1980s view that the only deterrent to a nuclear attack from the then Soviet Union was the belief that the UK could "flatten Moscow" in retaliation. This led to the UK building Trident and having at least one armed submarine at sea every hour of every day since.

Speaking in detail about the Trident review for the first time since he was sacked as minister, Harvey said: "If you can just break yourself out of that frankly almost lunatic mindset for a second, all sorts of alternatives start to look possible, indeed credible."

<snip>


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #1)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:42 PM

12. I'd never seen video of that before. They throw fucking trees.

Sweet Jesus. I didn't think people could do that.

PB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:12 PM

3. No disrespect to the Scots

No disrespect to the Scots, especially since I have Scotch-Irish blood, but are their prospects of "independence" any more credible than what Quebec throws at Canada every few years?

The SNP, as I understand, wants something similar to Dominion status within the Commonwealth (Canada, Australia, New Zealand) and full membership of the EU. Are they likely to get either, not to mention NATO?

They would also have to field their own armed forces, especially if they want to be in NATO. That's not cheap.

What about maintaining the National Health Service in Scotland? That's not cheap either, especially with a reduced tax base.

I don't disdain the fact that the Scots have the right to determine their own destiny...but count the costs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DissidentVoice (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:28 PM

4. Reasonablly credible, yes

There are arguments as to how much Scotland gets a net benefit, or makes a net payment, with the UK as a whole. With most of the North Sea oil coming in through Scotland, it's quite possible Scotland gave money, overall, to the rest of the country over the past couple of decades. However, production from the existing fields is dropping, so that won't continue. It does, however, have a lot of offshore (and onshore) wind potential, and a lot of generation potential from wave power (something England has very little of - the powerful waves come in west from the Atlantic, and that coastline is mostly Ireland and Scotland). As for all economies, really, it's a matter of if unemployment is too much. At the moment, it's fractionally under the UK average.

Yeah, they'd need their own armed forces, but their population is more than some other NATO countries; it wouldn't be unfeasible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:21 PM

5. Britain should quit wasting money on ballistic missile submarines

Russia or China are not going to launch a mass attack against Britain's land based nuclear-armed missiles. Iran can't. Subs were relevant in an environment of mutually assured destruction, but that period is long passed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:33 PM

6. Britain doesn't have any land-based nuclear weapons

The only ones are the submarine-based missiles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #6)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:41 PM

7. I didn't know that

That changes the story a bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:40 PM

11. Sea-based nukes are more secure, I would think.

A boomer at sea is impossible for a terrorist or hostile nation to raid and steal the nukes.

Air bases and bunkers, and missile silos, would seem to be more vulnerable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #11)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 07:20 AM

15. The RAF is allowed to shoot people who try to break in...eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:20 PM

8. What chutzpah.

 

They object to nuclear weapons, but want the protection of the organization that bears them.

Fuck them and the horse they stole from the English.

(For the record, I do have some Scots ancestry.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #8)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:33 PM

10. I have Scottish ancestry as well

And you are insulting and crass sir.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tkmorris (Reply #10)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:54 PM

13. Sheesh, it was a joke.

 

They probably stole them from the Romans far earlier.

P.S. Livestock raiding has a long and honored tradition amongst the clans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:24 PM

9. I support any country banning the deployment of nuclear weapons.

Hope the rest of the world follows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 06:33 AM

14. The paradox of the European Union is that it lowers the stakes for regions to push for independence.

Catalonia may be the catalyst for a renewed wave of separatism in the European Union, with Scotland and Flanders not far behind. The great paradox of the European Union, which is built on the concept of shared sovereignty, is that it lowers the stakes for regions to push for independence.

“The whole development of European integration has lowered the stakes for separation, because the entities that emerge know they don’t have to be fully autonomous and free-standing,” said Mark Leonard, the director of the European Council on Foreign Relations. “They know they’ll have access to a market of 500 million people and some of the protections of the E.U.” Traditionally, the European Union has been popular with the leaders of these regions, said Josef Janning, director of studies at the European Policy Center. “They see strengthening the power of Brussels as diminishing and relativizing national governments, a process accelerated by the single market in Europe,” Mr. Janning said.

In Scotland, for example, there was an assumption that if independent, it would join the bloc (EU) without a lot of fuss, since Scots are already citizens of the European Union. (After all, some 20 million East Germans became members of the European Union overnight without even having to whistle the anthem.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/sunday-review/a-european-union-of-more-nations.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread