Shaky defence

Share this article
0
Have your say

DEFENCE is clearly a very weak point in the armour of Scottish Nationalists.

They subscribe to the viewpoint of Angus Robertson MP that Scotland would best be defended by splitting the armed forces which currently defend the entire United Kingdom. Splitting the British Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force into two separate defence forces under two separate commands is a guaranteed way of undermining the defence of both Scotland and the remaining United Kingdom.

Douglas Turner (Letters, 4 July) chooses an interesting date to launch an attack on the “obscenity that is Trident”, which a minority of Scots do not wish to replace.

Luckily for Mr Turner and his fellow CND supporters (like the SNP), the threat of retaliation, rather than attack, using nuclear weapons, has kept the West safe for the past 68 years.

However, lest he disbelieve that, he has only to look at the series of surrogate wars against the West conducted by our ideological foes since the end of the last war. Soviet- or Communist-backed forces were involved in many wars against us since 1945. However, there has never been a war between the Soviet Union/Russia and Nato because we have been too strong, thanks to our nuclear weapons.

Andrew HN Gray

Craiglea Drive

Edinburgh

THE Scottish Government has now said that Scotland’s joining Nato would have to be negotiated. “The Loyal North British Provincials” seize on this statement as if it was of massive significance. Why?

If Scotland has to negotiate with Nato, so be it. If Nato’s terms are not to our taste we will not join, if they are acceptable then we will.

I cannot think why we would wish to join Nato given that no-one has been able to indicate any enemy who would seem to have any desire to attack us.

Given the strategic positioning of Scotland, I can see a distinct desire from Nato to have us on board. If I am correct then this puts Scotland in the driving seat when negotiating.
Why do we have to put up daily with all this froth? The government of Scotland which we will elect and which is elected by a proper democratic system, will deal with problems as they arise, this is what governments do.

R Mill Irving

Station Road

Gifford, East Lothian

TORY and Labour politicians supporting the No campaign on independence would have us believe that it is because of deep concern over the welfare of Scots in the post-UK world. Facts suggest other motives are at play.

They tell us Scotland could not defend itself if independent. Yet for many decades Scotland has paid billions into the defence programme. So by right a share of British armaments in the form of planes, tanks, and ships should accrue to Scotland. If they don’t, then neither should our share of the horrendous national debt incurred by Westminster to bail out the high street banks.

The same for oil. We have paid trillions into the Treasury since the oil first flowed, keeping the UK afloat. We are entitled to our share post-independence.

It is this loss, and no other reason, that is fuelling the Tory/Labour clique in a desperate bid to cling to absolutely everything. They really do want it all.

Robert Gritton

Glen Drive

Dyce, Aberdeen