Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Freeeeeeedom, 300 years on well maybe

  1. Jan 16, 2007 #1
    300 years after the Scot's hand was forced into signing the act of Union with the English, there is some REAL debate on whether the Union is mutually beneficial. Whether being *British* is still something that Scots are proud of, and want to keep. Whether Being independent from Westminster's rule will cause havoc throughout the British isles or will make Scotland a more strong and economically better place.

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/features/article2158022.ece

    Personally I think (without sitting on the fence to much) there are many good points, and equally as many bad points to Dissolving the Union. Scotland could prosper by going its own way, but it would be an uphill battle to begin with. Ireland is a good case study for this. Their Economy is now BOOMING. They have a wealth of Jobs, due to some clever Political decisions, and whats more is that Scotland also has far more natural resources.

    Tony Blair doesnt hold the same opinion as the SNP however:
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2549709,00.html

    This is more of a political crocodile than football, as it could, and IMHO will, rear its head and bite some unsuspecting Politician Leg, or perhaps head off if you dismiss this issue to lightly
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2007
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 16, 2007 #2

    Kurdt

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I am not at all fond of this idea. The union says certain things about the people of the two countries, that they have set aside certain social, political and cultural differences to work together. The world should as a whole be becoming more united not less. I realise that Scotland felt it was getting a bit of a bad deal in recent decades with respect to policy implementation, but one has to realise that britain has been recovering from the heavy costs of the second world war which primarily effected the south east of England. I live in the north east of England and can sympathise with this to an extent, but the whole point of devolution of government was for the Scottish people to make better decisions for themselves while still maintaining the strength of the two nations as one.

    The one thing I hate at the minute is how the different countries of the United kingdom have all kind of turned on each other. It makes me very uneasy that after so long it has come to this. I have no words to articulate my feelings at the minute so i'll leave it there.
     
  4. Jan 16, 2007 #3

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What would happen to the SIGINT stations in Hawklaw and Brora and the RAF bases at Edzell, Prestwick, etc? The Brits have much more than economic reasons for worry.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2007
  5. Jan 16, 2007 #4
    I favor small goverment
    the only way to get smaller goverment
    is smaller countrys
    the euro union has replaced the super state
    with a more limited regional goverment
    so I see little down side to this idea
     
  6. Jan 17, 2007 #5

    Garth

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Don't you mean the English will have more than economic reasons for worry?

    Scots are "Brits", alongside the Welsh, N.Irish and English.

    The RAF bases will move south of the border, they are closing down lots of bases in any case.

    Garth
     
  7. Jan 17, 2007 #6
    Yeap, correct, also Trident would have to move.. It would be a serious endevour to detangel the two nations, but I think the English have more to loose than the scots. Scots are very split on this subject, the ecconomy north of the border is getting better now.
    I dont aggree this is a valid reason. The Scots coffers where used up (and blood) just as fast, (perhaps faster wrt blood). We all took a hit, the SE of England is now one of the most prosperus places in the world, while the rest of the UK was chocking on the removal of Manufacturing, especially in Scotland, NE England and Wales...
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2007
  8. Jan 17, 2007 #7

    J77

    User Avatar

    Let them split if they want.

    If they did, I'd like to see the Scots embrace the euro - like Ireland has done - they got probably get a load of EU subsidies for being a poor country.

    But what about our new supremo - Mr Brown - still, probably no loss there.

    It'll probably end in tears...
     
  9. Jan 17, 2007 #8

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yes, I misspoke.
     
  10. Jan 17, 2007 #9

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    :rofl: There are quite a few people in these groups who would take exception to that. :biggrin:

    My ancestry spans N. Ireland, Scotland and England, and my ancestors fought on both sides of the Wars of Scottish Independence.

    I think of Scotland as being distinct from England, but I hope the situation is resolved amicably. Self-determination provides a strong motivation it would seem.

    Certainly one issue will be the North Sea oil.
     
  11. Jan 17, 2007 #10

    J77

    User Avatar

    There's no issue - just mumbles and more mumbles, same as ever :smile:
     
  12. Jan 17, 2007 #11
    Owch.... the UK now gets a LOAD of cash from brussels, Billions of Euro's, because back in the day the ecconomy of the UK was flagging behind that of its continental counterparts

    Part of the SNP manifesto is to join the Euro anyway.

    Unfortunatly I tend to aggree with that statement.. If Scotland was to Split from England then they would not have anyone to blame for their probems

    Actually England Scotland Wales Ireland are all part of the British Isles
     
  13. Jan 17, 2007 #12

    Garth

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Often confusion between British and English proliferates.

    For example, in 'Mrs. Doubtfire' Robin Williams describes himself as coming from 'England' while speaking an American attempt at an obviously Scottish accent.

    Would somebody from the Southern States call him/herself a Yankee, because in the rest of the world 'Yank' means somebody from the U.S.A.?

    Union was first achieved by England taking on a Scottish King, not the other way round, King James VI of Scotland from 1567 became James I of England in 1603. The Scottish Parliament was finally dissolved in 1707 and re-established in 1999.

    If Scotland gains its independence then I shall be able to call myself English and not British, and have an English Parliament not a British one run by Scots.....

    But we are all European now. :smile:

    Garth
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2007
  14. Jan 17, 2007 #13

    J77

    User Avatar

    in reply to anttech's post

    Did I type: "they got probably get" ?!?

    That bad use of language must come from my Dad's side...


    (...Scots! :tongue: )
     
  15. Jan 17, 2007 #14
    The Monarchy was united, ie the James was king of Scotland and England, but the seats were still not joined.

    Another good point, the UK is kinda run by Scots... And even if we split you can still call yourself British just not from the UK.. :smile:
     
  16. Jan 17, 2007 #15
    You mean much gooder use of Langauage :smile:
     
  17. Jan 17, 2007 #16

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    We are all part of one humanity. We probably all originated from the same puddle of mud a few billion years ago anyway. :biggrin:
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Freeeeeeedom, 300 years on well maybe
  1. A year in Iraq (Replies: 0)

Loading...