Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

wotsthat wrote: »

F the MP's.

57/59 of Scottish people are against action in Syria? Shame on the SNP for trying to make political capital out of such an issue.

The SNP MP's did as they were told by Sturgeon because it was deemed a step towards Scottish independence.

I hate nationalism.

Good for you.

57 out of 59 MP's, not people. You're another one that needs to go an take some deep breaths. You seem to have missed most of the English Labour party voting against airstrikes too for some reason. I doubt it was anything to do with steps towards Scottish independence. Frankly.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Also well done to the UUP, the DUP, the independent MP and the Lib Dems.

Proper cross party support tonight. (With one glaring exception)

Leanne1812

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And on that topic, how on earth do any of the SNP mob here justify their party's support for abandoning the people of Syria to this bunch?

For allowing them to continue raping, pillaging, murdering, and terrorising with no fear of reprisals?

I don't think anyone is in disagreement that IS needs to be eradicated. Or that its actions are anything other than barbaric. I'm not saying just sit back and wait for terror to enfold here is correct either but it's how to defeat an ideology? Won't bombing just create more terrorists?

The question mp's were asked to vote on was British involvement in air strikes. I don't think for a second any MP took it lightly or voted without listening carefully to the debates.

If you want to tar the SNP alone you should think about how the conservatives voted en masse for. Were they just following their leader too or are they alone capable of independent thought?

I am not in agreement that air strikes are the best course of action. I came to that decision after reading about the conflict in Syria & weighing up ( independently ) whether I felt it would achieve a successful outcome. I fear we are entering into another long drawn out war which will soon mean boots on the ground, death, destruction, bigger chaos in the region and still no successful resolution. Do you believe air strikes alone will defeat IS? or will it mean 'degrading' for a short while only to soon grow again? I don't think questions about who funds them amongst other things have been properly addressed or answered.

As Shakes said this is not the thread for it but I am happy to contribute on DT.

Mistermeaner

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Yes. But the arguments to stay in will be exactly the same. I excluded currency from your points. Because it's a non-issue. But everything else will be complete doomsday if the UK leaves. In actuality, no-one knows what will happen if the UK does.

Currency a non-issue?

It really is independence for the sake of it, regardless of cost.

To compare uk leaving eu to Scotland leaving uk is ignorance or stupidity of the highest order; especially if you consider one of the main differences a 'non-issue'

.string.

Mistermeaner wrote: »

As I thought shakey , not an ounce of substance. It really is indi at any cost. Great for those who have mostly completed their working lives, got house and saving and pensions and not long to work.... I feel sorry for the youth of Scotland.

Yes, that's right - it's difficult to take SNP policies seriously, especially when they relate to GB matters. Anything to stir up division, never mind the principle.

I watched some of the debate last night so heard some of the things said by SNP MPs. I can't say I was impressed; I did not hear all of the speeches so there may be a gem in there somewhere, but what I heard was on the silly side of the anti-bomb argument: arguing against dropping bombs indiscriminately from 30/40/50 thousands feet, or whatever it was, demanding a comprehensive political plan when everyone and his dog knows that a political push is already in motion and that GB is not in a position to take a major position in defining it's substance, etc.

Better arguments? I don't think so!

@Hamish, yes I think the SNP did badly by Scotland, let alone GB which they would paint as a wimp of a country unwilling to support its allies, but then they are in their own little obsession and I for one, don't associate them with Scotland.


PS responding to something Shakey wrote, I do agree that the Labour party had some which made similar daft statements, but then they had a "Free" vote. I thought Benn's speech was exceptional both on delivery and content. He'd serve Labour better than Corbychev.

wotsthat

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Good for you.

57 out of 59 MP's, not people. You're another one that needs to go an take some deep breaths. You seem to have missed most of the English Labour party voting against airstrikes too for some reason. I doubt it was anything to do with steps towards Scottish independence. Frankly.

I doubt Labour politicians voted against action in Syria because of their views on Scottish independence either - it's a deflecting non argument.

Do you believe Sturgeon and her inner circle sat in SNP towers discussing this matter and nobody asked the question 'what position on Syria puts us closer to independence?'. I don't.

wotsthat

.string. wrote: »

Anything to stir up division, never mind the principle.

Where there is harmony, may we bring discord. Where there is truth, may we bring error. Where there is faith, may we bring doubt. And where there is hope, may we bring despair.

MFW_ASAP

Interesting story in the Indy this morning about how funding education at University is negatively impacting schools. The gist was that there is only so much money to go around and so instead of university funding being the 'great leveler', its disproportionately impacting schooling in poorer areas. this results in poorer grades that prevent kids from deprived areas actually getting grades good enough to go to a free university.

What's more interesting is because Sturgeon has stated that University places will be free 'as long as I am in government', and Salmond stated that free uni places is the policy of which he is most proud, this anomaly is not going to change any time soon.

It's always disappointing to see policies set in stone because of the egos or philosophies of those in power. Much better to have a pragmatic approach and review/modify policies as time goes by and the data gives you an indication of problems.

There is no way for the SNP to modify their approach to uni funding, so the education budget will continue to be stretched, causing chronic underfunding not only to schools, but also to universities also.

chris_m

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I don't think anyone is in disagreement that IS needs to be eradicated. Or that its actions are anything other than barbaric. I'm not saying just sit back and wait for terror to enfold here is correct either but it's how to defeat an ideology? Won't bombing just create more terrorists?

As many of the speakers in yesterday's debate said - yes it might create more Daesh terrorists, but doing nothing will create more.
All of the non-Daesh world is a target, some countries (including the UK) more so. They have to be stopped, not just for our own security but for that of the entire world.

CLAPTON

what is certain is that the SNP wouldn't have fought at Bannackburn.