UK - Election 2015

[Peter May]

Yes. Cut Scotland off. Then we will decide what nukes we need, what army and navy we need. We fought long enough for the British Empire.

Yes, this is true, probably none more than the Scots. They fought with us at the Battle of New Orleans.
Many great regiments where raised, I'm sure you are well aware as I am, the contribution the Scots have made to the defence of the UK. The SNP would seek to destroy this alliance which has endured for
over 300 years, would the SNP destroy this alliance to win an election?
Let's say my reaction is just an unfortunate reaction to the devolvement of the UK

 

[Francesca R]

I think it was more of a figure of speech.

Yes, could be. Or possibly a self-serving lie even. Bit of a grey area perhaps.

 

[Dissolution]

What part of obvious logic is odd, exactly?

The part where they relentlessly promote a party that they're opposed to on a wide variety of subjects, including that party's raison d'etre.

 

[dudalb]

Yes. Cut Scotland off. Then we will decide what nukes we need, what army and navy we need. We fought long enough for the British Empire.

In other words, you will freeload off the US ,the UK and Nato.Nice.

 

[MikeG]

.........We fought long enough for the British Empire.

You make it sound like this was done under duress.

 

[Francesca R]

The part where they relentlessly promote a party that they're opposed to on a wide variety of subjects, including that party's raison d'etre.

Ah. OK. Well, it's known as politics.

 

[Craig B]

You make it sound like this was done under duress.

It was largely done by highlanders cleared from their land. The value accorded to them was not always high. http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_117538_en.pdf

But not always under duress I agree. However, the empire has now expired, so the Union is less relevant. The decline in the regard for it in Scotland tracks the decline of Empire quite closely. Appropriate: for the Scots submitted to the Union in order to obtain access to English overseas markets, their own imperial venture having failed miserably. Now we have the EU: it is significant that this is much more popular here than in England, by all accounts.

 

[Craig B]

In other words, you will freeload off the US ,the UK and Nato.Nice.

Having the power to decide our own defence needs is "freeloading"? That makes the Yanks cross? Dear me.

 

[Information Analyst]

The separatist party has quadrupled its membership.

Which is, of course, meaningless outside of what it is.

 

[Giz]

Having the power to decide our own defence needs is "freeloading"? That makes the Yanks cross? Dear me.

You'll take advantage of the protection and trade of the pax Americana while acting self righteous about contributing nothing to global stability.

I imagine some yanks may be mildly exasperated at such childish ingratitude.

 

[Craig B]

You'll take advantage of the protection and trade of the pax Americana while acting self righteous about contributing nothing to global stability.

I imagine some yanks may be mildly exasperated at such childish ingratitude.

You would think that having armed to the teeth to fight the International Communist Menace, when that menace disappears, it would obviate the necessity of spending a hundred billion pounds renewing a system of weapons of mass destruction.

Your language is wonderfully forthright; trade and stability under the Pax Americana. Can imperialism not even find a new terminology?

 

[Giz]

Your language is wonderfully forthright; trade and stability under the Pax Americana. Can imperialism not even find a new terminology?

Remind me as to why trade and stability and security are bad things?

 

[Francesca R]

You would think that having armed to the teeth to fight the International Communist Menace, when that menace disappears, it would obviate the necessity of spending a hundred billion pounds renewing a system of weapons of mass destruction.

That was a bit tame. I think you're supposed to extend the logic a bit to where America manufactures new replacement enemies via its foreign adventurism in order to fuel persistent demand for military spending so that Republican Party politicians can divert billions to their cronies in the business and they can all be rich. Isn't that the ultimate end-game we need to wise up to?

 

[Darat]

Would you believe it, at last month's budget it totally slipped Osborne's mind to mention the extra 8 billion for the NHS he'd left in his desk.

 

[Craig B]

Remind me as to why trade and stability and security are bad things?

The purveyors of the Pax Romana used to ask that too.

 

[Giz]

The purveyors of the Pax Romana used to ask that too.

And mussolini made the trains run on time. Does that make future attempts to make the trains run on time a bad thing?

 

[Dissolution]

Ah. OK. Well, it's known as politics.

Well aware of that. Doesn't make it any less shady.
The win at all costs mentality is one of the many reasons why such a large amount of potential voters are disillusioned with the whole thing.

 

[Francesca R]

The win at all costs mentality

Well I think you made that bit up yourself.

I was wondering why something you thought was obvious logic was also odd. Never mind.

 

[jimbob]

Au contraire Ed doesn't do deals. Even if it's family he knifes opponents and leaves them in the dirt

I still don't get that.

Should brothers who disagree on something allow the eldest to have their way because family?

 

[Rum]

What do people think, in terms of a democratic deficit, are the consequences of a hung Parliament with the SNP holding the controlling cards?