Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Drink Driving, Don't Risk It!

SNP will block nuclear arms in Scotland, Cameron told

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 29 June 2009
SNP ministers last night served notice to a future Tory government that they would try to use devolved powers to block new nuclear weapons coming to Scotland.
The warning is an escalation of a row started when Conservative leader David Cameron told the SNP they should not interfere with decisions on nuclear weapons such as replacing the Trident missile system.

Sources close to Mr Cameron claimed that h
is comments in an interview broadcast last night were aimed at trying to promote "the respect agenda" between Westminster and Holyrood.

It was claimed Mr Cameron was giving an example of powers reserved to the UK in which Holyrood should not get involved. In the same interview he made it clear a Conservative government would keep out of devolved issues and not try to reverse Holyrood's decisions.

The comments have sparked a row between the Nationalists and the Conservatives.

Britain's Trident nuclear missile submarines are kept at Faslane on the Clyde but the SNP argues that nuclear weapons should not be based in Scotland.

First Minister Alex Salmond yesterday made it clear that on nuclear weapons his party represented a clear majority view among Scottish MSPs, MPs, civic Scotland and members of the public.

He said it would be wrong of a Scottish Government not to represent those views on the issue.

Last night his spokesman went further, threatening to use devolved powers to block weapons of mass destruction.

The SNP has prevented new nuclear power stations being built in Scotland through the use of devolved powers on planning. Despite calls to have these re- reserved to Westminster the Calman Commission on devolution came down on Holyrood's side.

A working party set up by the Scottish Government to examine how nuclear weapons can be removed from Scotland – which is expected to report later this year – is considering how devolved powers might be used to block a Trident replacement.

The First Minister's spokesman said: "Of course we would use any powers available to us to block any new weapons of mass destruction coming to Scotland. We certainly have a mandate for that in Scotland.

"I'm afraid this is a classic example of the Tories showing themselves in their old colours again of treating Scotland not like a country but an English county."

The Tories said the issue had been blown out of proportion.

A spokesman added: "Mr Cameron was talking about respect for devolved and reserved powers, but once again the SNP have shown that their default position is about burning bridges not building them."





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 28 June 2009 11:48 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish National Party
 
1

Jerry Springer,

28/06/2009 23:03:05
Good evening sm753.

A quiz question for you.............Who said this?

"The objective through the smoke of this economic battlefield is not just to access the powers we have got. It is to provide the underplay, provide the backbone of prosperity and focus for the future."

Here is a clue...................

Last week in FMQ he was talking about an 'internacine war'. (sic)

(The sic part is especially for Bully boy who does not understand why one may use inverted commas).

2

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 29/06/2009 00:40:58
It's not about burning or building bridges. It is simply that the opinion of Scotland is we don't want these WMD based in Scotland. It is part of the platform the SNP were elected upon, like Independence.

The SNP, unlike the unionist parties don't make this policy up as they go along, dependent on how best to win votes.
3

Castaway™ ,

29/06/2009 00:45:41
The Scottish Government and Parliament have the unquestionable right, and indeed duty, to express themselves on any issue that concerns the welfare of the people and land of Scotland and where possible the Scottish Government to take any appropriate measures (all legal means) to carry out the will of the Scottish Parliament.

The Scottish Parliament -15 June 2007
The majority, 71 MSPs vote against the replacement the Trident nuclear missile system while only 16 voted for the plan, while 39 MSPs abstained.

UK Parliament - 14 March 2007
The majority of Scottish Constituency MPs at Westminster voted against the government plans to renew the nuclear weapons system.
4

Brianwci,

29/06/2009 00:56:50
Alex Salmond is onto a sure fire winner with Trident. Holyrood doesn't want it, the people don't want and the left wing and nationalists of the Labour party in Scotland certainly doesn't want it.

Ah, but Ms Goldie and her flock do want it. Trouble is Ms Goldie and co are a bit light in terms of numbers.
5

,

29/06/2009 01:34:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Barney Thomson,

Reading 29/06/2009 01:46:17
#7 Brianwci

Most of the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland don't want Trident either.

They realise that the nations of the UK no longer have the strategic requirement or the financial capability to continue the archaic jingoism that is WMD capability.
7

Edward,

29/06/2009 02:02:44
Wasnt this story out over the weekend?
Ah then again David Maddox likes repeating, a bit like a bad plate of onions!
8

Edward,

29/06/2009 02:06:02
The Panorama programe on Scottish Independence, which is being broadcast tonight, should be interesting.
Interesting that is to see if its factual or if its slanted
My money is on slanted against Independence, instead of being factual and providing a truthful background
Bet they dont even refer to the recent documentary on BBC Alba about how the Scottish people were lied to
Remember its the BBC, so expect Bias
9

Fletty73,

Stirling 29/06/2009 02:42:10
When the USA say it's staying, it's staying.
No one else really gets a say.
10

,

29/06/2009 03:16:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 29/06/2009 05:12:06
# 16 SS

"Maybe a compromise is possible."

Sure, just move them someplace where the majority of people support having them. Like Ascension Island or Diego Garcia.
12

Jeeemy,

St Andrews 29/06/2009 05:33:57
Folk’s its ok don’t worry we already know that Gordon Brown has already come to the conclusion that we shall not be replacing the WMD’s on the Clyde.

Saint David has also come to the conclusion that the Aircraft carriers will not be needed either.

Let us start with Trident, our American suppliers cannot give us the bits and pieces that we require to refurbish the missiles, Aldermaston cannot build the warheads that’s why the number of warheads are to be reduced therefore there will be no need to replace the 4 Trident Submarines. They will be decommissioned at Rosyth and join the others already there, as no one knows what to do with the hulks already there they will just keep adding to Scotland’s problem.

Now for the Carriers, we handed over to our dear friends on the other side of the pond our ready acceptance that they would build and we would purchase the next generation of carrier STOL aircraft. That has gone pear shaped as well, the aircraft is almost twice the weight, of the concept weight upon which the carrier design is based.

The result being we are to build two large aircraft carriers and no aircraft to fly from them.

After all that we now come to the question of paying for paying for all of the pipedreams of the MOD, we find we cannot provide the cash it went to the bankers, Gordon has now discovered that you can’t spend the same pound twice try as he may. Saint David having now been made privy to the books as is the custom at this time of a Parliament has come to the same conclusion.
13

Jeeemy,

St Andrews 29/06/2009 05:36:13
Oop's After all that we now come to the question of paying for all of the pipedreams of the MOD, we find we cannot provide the cash it went to the bankers, Gordon has now discovered that you can’t spend the same pound twice try as he may. Saint David having now been made privy to the books as is the custom at this time of a Parliament has come to the same conclusion
14

donald,

glasgow 29/06/2009 05:36:17
When were the Scottish people ever consulted about having Trident in their backyard?

Return to Sender!
15

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 29/06/2009 06:37:03
Move them to The Mersey or the The Thames or Devonport if you love them so much >
Also take your rotting Polaris subs from Rosyth,and place them similarly.
16

All Politicians are the same,

29/06/2009 06:45:42
Now for the Carriers, we handed over to our dear friends on the other side of the pond our ready acceptance that they would build and we would purchase the next generation of carrier STOL aircraft. That has gone pear shaped as well, the aircraft is almost twice the weight, of the concept weight upon which the carrier design is based.

The result being we are to build two large aircraft carriers and no aircraft to fly from them.

Is that why we already have 4 aircraft flying in the Uk as we run teats and trials?
17

Big Dave Fae The Rigs,

Keep Auchter Turra Nuke Free 29/06/2009 07:02:31
Good News less chance of living with a time bomb...

A radioactive leak that could have caused Britain's worst nuclear disaster was only averted when a worker in an adjoining room spotted water as he sorted laundry, according to a newly-obtained official report.


By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
Published: 7:00AM BST 11 Jun 2009
Nuclear disaster averted by dirty laundry
Disaster was averted at Sizewell A after a worker sorting laundry spotted water Photo: PA

More than 40,000 gallons of radioactive water leaked into the open when a 15ft crack appeared in a pipe leading to a cooling pond in the Sizewell A reactor in January 2007.

If the worker had not spotted it, the pool, which contained 5,000 spent uranium fuel rods, could have run dry, causing the rods to ignite which would have sparked a supercharged radioactive fire, it was claimed.

Despite the potential severity of the incident, no one has been fined or prosecuted.

HM Nuclear Installation Inspectorate, which compiled the report into the leak and found "significant risk that members of the public could have been harmed", only issued a safety directive to Magnox South, the site's operator.

It recognises that a prosecution may have been thought appropriate but none was undertaken. A prosecution would have taken "considerable resources" at a time when the NII was financially "stretched", it added.
18

Big Dave Fae The Rigs,

29/06/2009 07:07:57
A spokesman added: "Mr Cameron was talking about respect for devolved and reserved powers, but once again the SNP have shown that their default position is about burning bridges not building them."

That'll be the "respect for Scotland" out the window then...

Leopard Spots
19

dunedin bully wee 1877,

29/06/2009 07:45:13
In a recent BBC Scotland opinion poll 4% described themselves as British, not Scottish.

Rufus and Smee probably think that this is an overwhelming majority.
20

Boab1,

29/06/2009 08:14:41
Readers may like to know that the BBC have decided to call this Panorama programme 'Will the Scots ever be happy?'. I've already e-mailed my complaint to them about this, quite frankly, offensive title.
21

McNasty,

Edinburgh 29/06/2009 08:16:07
Keep mouthing of Mr. Cameron and you will wipe out any chance of getting even one MP in Scotland.
22

Jock E,

Edinburgh 29/06/2009 08:48:09
Alex Salmond does not and never has represented me and many of my friends. I have no problem with Nuclear Energy. It is less of an environmental problem than coal or oil burning. Torness is a model power station and something for Scotland to be proud of.

Remove nuclear facilities from Faslane and hundreds of Scottish jobs will be lost. If The UK government was to get beligerent like Mr Salmonds or lose confidence in the Scottish Parliament it could move all Navy engineering and shipbuilding to England, and all defence sites from Scotland.

Life is a little more complicated than Mr Salmond thinks.
23

Toast,

29/06/2009 08:51:48
Any right minded person would want rid of Trident not just from Scotland but from the UK,an obscene wast of money that could be far better spent equiping our troop properly for the role they now play,it is a political prop to allow brown to sit at the "top" table,drop the great from GB.
24

dunedin bully wee 1877,

29/06/2009 08:57:33
28 Jock E

“Remove nuclear facilities from Faslane”

Is that a euphemism for Weapons of Mass destruction?
25

Teamdroid,

29/06/2009 09:07:44
#17 is that the people currently on Diego Garcia, or the people ethnically cleansed from there by the British to turn it into a US air base?
26

InThePark,

29/06/2009 09:16:29
Its not so much the replacement of trident as the placement, listening to David Cameron you would think we were being totally unreasonable about not wanting nuclear missiles housed in Scotland.

If they are so keen on UK nuclear deterrent, house them were they will be welcomed, maybe ask the electorate in England or Wales if they want it in their back yard.
27

mad world,

yorkshire 29/06/2009 09:23:12
'tis strange?
I dont think Cameron is as daft as some of you believe ' and with this caveat I for the first time think he may well be playing the 'put up or shut up card' either be part of the UK with the benefits and negatives that that brings or vote for independence and go your own way! Remember that the SNP are never going to co-operate with Westminster if they can get away and will take every opportunity to attack Westminster! So just maybe he's smarter than some of us think.. personally I think if we are going to have Nuclear missiles and submarines I think it would be prudent to have 2 bases that can handle them.. Not a great supporter of Nuclear weapons but then again no world wars since 1945?
28

nabodican,

Newton Stewart 29/06/2009 09:29:26
Wee fat Eck can't pick and choose which weapons we will have in Scotland. Scotland is either part of the UK for defence purposes or it is not.
29

Lee John,

29/06/2009 09:33:17
Cameron goads SNP over nuclear weapons.
SNP respond.
Majority of Scots don't want nuclear weapons
Scots vote increasingly for the SNP in General election.
Fewer labour members in Westminster.
Cameron's master plan.

30

InThePark,

29/06/2009 09:34:44
Shouldn’t Scotland defence and military be proportionate to its population?

And if Scotland cannot pick and choose what it needs for defence, then yes maybe you are right! It should not be part of the UK’s with regards to defence.
31

mad world,

29/06/2009 09:48:36

#35
Shouldn’t Scotland defence and military be proportionate to its population?

In what respect? Only allowing a 9% Scottish representation? I dont think that would be good for either the MOD or Scots.. Remember the 5 Fs

or only allocating 9% of facilities or spending to Scotland?




32

The Tin Man,

29/06/2009 09:52:06
We are ruled by posing half-baked morons.

Is the scotty gov so incredibly stupid as to be unaware of the presence of nuclear weapons in Scotland right here and now, in reality, in the present?

What are they doing about the real atom bombs?

So what is it: 'Scotland doesn't want nukes', or 'Scotland doesn't want want nukes to replace the nukes that are here already, but we won't mention the ones that are here already - they can stay'?

Or, are they just trying to have the news in a, in a very real, Blair sense?
33

Jerry Springer,

29/06/2009 10:03:13
Cynicus in Exile,29/06/2009 02:29:29
"Remember its the BBC, so expect Bias"-#13, Edward

As in your "recent documentary on BBC Alba?"
=====================================================

HA HA

Cynicus Bang on the money as always!
34

InThePark,

29/06/2009 10:07:47
#36

I guess the point I'm making is, does a country with a population of 5 million, need a nuclear weapons system that costs 2 billion a year to maintain. And 20 billion to renew.
35

dunedin bully wee 1877,

29/06/2009 10:08:52
37 The Tin Man


As I recall, the original Tin Man was bereft of a heart, it rather looks as if you may have mutated into being also bereft of a brain.
36

dunedin bully wee 1877,

29/06/2009 10:12:43
38 Rufus


The usual words of wisdom from Mr 4%
37

Jerry Springer,

29/06/2009 10:19:17
How is the 'internacine' war coming along Bully Boy
?

By the way, that was a classic response from Cynicus.

He is no unionist and gives me a hell of a hard time each day, but credit where credit is due, he always has a good argument and is normally very funny with it.
38

The Tin Man,

29/06/2009 10:19:43
#40 bully

'Nae nukes, unless they're already here' is the brainless 'argument', thank you. Hardly qualifies as an argument, though - I'm sure the Cameron will do his appeasement act and not make fun of it.
39

mad world,

29/06/2009 10:22:01
#39

On the face of it No! but then that might be a question you want to pose to Israel?
But at the moment you are part of a Union of 60 million and with that the answer maybe different.. Nuclear is alway an immotive issue, something not lost on the SNP as i'm pretty sure this issue will swing a few more voters towards the SNP.. Something i'm pretty sure Cameron knows as well.. 2010 is going to be an interesting year..
40

Lee John,

29/06/2009 10:23:26
Jerry (whose only response is to slag other posters)

How about the 11,000 jobs Jerry?
41

Lee John,

29/06/2009 10:24:56
2007
"If the government goes ahead with the plans, nuclear weapons would be based in Scotland for the next 50 years. Would you support or oppose nuclear weapons being based in Scotland for this period of time?"

Oppose 64%
Support 30%
Don't know 6%
42

dunedin bully wee 1877,

29/06/2009 10:26:49
42 Rufus


Apart from your apparent difficulty in spelling the word, what exactly is your problem with it?

Or do you still think that people speak with balloons coming out of their mouths whereupon you can read what they are saying?

internecine (adj)

1. Mutually destructive; most often applied to warfare.

2. Characterized by struggle within a group, usually applied to an ethnic or familial relationship.
43

Lee John,

29/06/2009 10:29:41
LDV (LibDem Voice) Small poll of 304 readers

Trident is the wrong deterrent and too expensive: 81%

We should defer a decision until after the 2010 talks: 9%

No – we should commit now to renewing Trident: 10%

Poll ran: 17th-22nd June 2009
44

Lee John,

29/06/2009 10:30:27
Labouronline.org

Should the Government renew the Trident programme?
Yes: 50%
No: 49%
45

Lee John,

29/06/2009 10:34:10
Daily Mail vote is 50:50
46

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/06/2009 11:50:17
#49/50, Lee John.

Were these Polls UK-wide?
47

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/06/2009 11:55:45
#43, Tin Man.

The SNP Government is prepared to use its devolved powers to prevent the replacement of the current Trident fleet; the replacement will require a much expanded facility.

Mr. Cameron, on the otherhand, is prepared to override the democratic competency of the Scottish Parliament.

So much for UK democracy.
48

frank mcbride,

29/06/2009 11:58:53
#26, Jock E.

Is that what's called "the Union Dividend"?
49

mr broon,

Edinburgh 29/06/2009 12:10:55
The closer a General Election comes with an inevitable Conservative landslide victory, the new Prime Minister will be able to do whatever he pleases.....in England.

However, according to a series of recent opinion polls North of the Border, the now minority Scots Tories have a long way to go before they double, or even treble, ONE Member of Parliament at Westminster.

A future Conservative Government may well have a few run ins with the Nationalists but their problems will really begin, if another Labour/Lib-Dem coalition wins at Holyrood.

Trident is the least of a future Tory Prime Minister's problems!
50

The Tin Man,

29/06/2009 12:13:13
#52 Frank

I in no way support nuclear arms, but this is Salmond doing his executive dictator bit, and you are completely mistaken that this has anything to do with democracy.

Was there a democratic vote on the subject in Holyrood? No.

Is Salmond doing anything about existing, real, actual nuclear weapons in Scotland? No, nothing at all.

Frank, you are getting confused between 'hot air for headlines' and democracy.
51

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/06/2009 12:23:23
#55, Tin Man.

The Scottish Parliament -15 June 2007
The majority, 71 MSPs vote against the replacement the Trident nuclear missile system while only 16 voted for the plan, while 39 MSPs abstained.

UK Parliament - 14 March 2007
The majority of Scottish Constituency MPs at Westminster voted against the government plans to renew the nuclear weapons system.

You may care to check the above but, you'll find that they're accurate.

As for the current situation, the SP can do nothing under the present devolution settlement and, as such, is working within both the word, and spirit, of the legislation.

This is something that Mr. Cameron is, apparently, not prepared to do.

It would appear that it is you (TM) who is confused.
52

John S,

29/06/2009 12:30:49
Trident bound for Wales?
A report in today's Scotland on Sunday claims that the Ministry of Defence is so worried about the movement towards independence for Scotland that it is considering moving the UK's nuclear missiles out of the country, apparently the ministry has already closely examined four sites for Trident's replacement outside of Scotland.

This is clearly good news for Scotland and the fact that the MoD is making plans for the eventuality of Scottish independence suggests that Westminster is beginning to accept the inevitable end of the 1707 union.

However the report goes on to explain where these four sites outside Scotland are:

Scotland on Sunday has learned that the swing towards the SNP forced the MoD to review three sites in England and one in Wales. The sites were originally considered as potential hosts for the UK's nuclear deterrent when the government was seeking a base for the Polaris system in the 1960s.

The MoD's preferred option is to place the nuclear missiles in Devonport, but as Devonport does not presently have a facility where missiles can be loaded, unloaded and stored, no final decision has been made and none of the four sites have been dismissed. So Trident might be moved from Scotland to Pembrokeshire.15/04/07 ::http://tinyurl.com/mmgszc
53

billalba,

fife 29/06/2009 12:35:39
#56 the tinman talks shi@@ your answer which is correct will be ignored he will come back with the same lies the next time the subject is raised.
54

Observer,,

Glasgow 29/06/2009 12:57:17
I think Westminster has conceded to this already. Why else did they not claw back planning powers through Calman. God knows we were all aware that this fight was coming up and that the Scottish Govt were going to use their powers to prevent siting of WMD on Scotish soil.

So why didn't Westminster attemptto stop them when it had the chance ?

Very odd.
55

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/06/2009 13:08:13
#59, Observer.

It is covered in Calman, but very covertly.

The section on discussion of devolved issues at Westminster covers it.

I don't have the document before me, but I think it's covered in Section 5 of the Exec. Summary.
56

John S,

29/06/2009 13:13:42
#60 frank mcbride: Could this be what you meant from the Calman report ?

RECOMMENDATION 4.15: A new legislative procedure should be established to allow the Scottish Parliament to seek the consent of the UK Parliament to legislate in reserved areas where there is an interaction with the exercise of devolved powers.
57

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/06/2009 13:37:21
#61, John S.

Interesting, isn't it, that this recommendation should be going only one way. Notice that it doesn't require Westminster to seek consent from Holyrood.

Rec. 4.2 is also interesting in this regard.

One has to ask, why can't the agreed Recs. of Calman swiftly be put in place?

Perhaps the answer lies in Section 4.
58

The Scotchman,

29/06/2009 14:29:52
#57 Trident bound for Wales?

They'll dump them anywhere but England, eh?!

If Camoron did have to dump them in England, then you know it would be in the north. Probably sitting as close to the Scottish border as possible.
59

Jerry Springer,

29/06/2009 14:37:31
#47 Bully Boy

I see you had my post deleted yesterday in which you made a bungling fool of yourself once again trying to correct me over 'internacine' war.

Dear oh dear do you have no self respect?

Onnce again you tried to be Mr Knowitall trying to correct me over a mistake that I never made in the first place.

The mistake was of course made by your hero Salmond at FMQ.

Salmond thought he was being a smart ass and even although he has his preprepared script he was harping on about 'internacine' wars.

He blew it and Tavish Scott made a monkey of him over it.

Just like you constantly make a monkey of yourself.
60

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 29/06/2009 14:41:32
#1 "Either this paper employs idiot reporters, or Salmond is an idiot"

Actually, there is a third, much more obvious possibility, Hag.
61

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 29/06/2009 14:42:43
#7 Susan

Anything worthwhile to say?
62

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 29/06/2009 14:44:57
I think that Scotland has done its bit in accommodating nuclear weapons for so many decades.

Time now for the people in the SE of England to take their turn. I bet they would be over the moon with the prospect.
63

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 29/06/2009 14:46:31
"SNP will block nuclear arms in Scotland, Cameron told"

And with the blessing of the Scottish electorate and opposition parties.
64

Seannair,

Oban 29/06/2009 14:54:35
Unionists are struggling with this

The SNP has consistently opposed nuclear weapons and have always had reservations about nuclear power.Those who suggest that nuclear is safe have yet to explain how we safely dispose of long term waste and how we cost that process.

Salmond is simply stating that Scottish opinion on this should carry weight and Cameron appears to be saying that Scottish opinion does not matter.There will always be a few supine Scots who feel the same way but it is gratifying to see that they are now but a vociferous minority.These were the likes that suggested that they would leave Scotland if the SNP gained power! .....if only!
65

Lee John,

29/06/2009 15:22:15
Jerry (still with nothing to say except slag)

Any update on the 11,000 jobs that will be lost? You know? The jobs that official figures are at variance with your own? Do you make things up so you can "prove" your point? I say no. What do YOU think Jerry?

Any chance of debating Jerry?
Any chance of not picking up a miniscule point made by a poster and flogging it to death Jerry?
Any chance of not coming across as a know-it-all (but is always wrong) Jerry?
You bore me. Sorry Jerry, but you do.

66

Electric Hermit,

29/06/2009 15:25:37
24
Boab1

"Readers may like to know that the BBC have decided to call this Panorama programme 'Will the Scots ever be happy?'. I've already e-mailed my complaint to them about this, quite frankly, offensive title."

It gets worse! This is the blurb from the programme's website -

"Ten years after devolution the Scots want still more power concentrated north of the border, and the Scottish Nationalists want to force a referendum on independence. Can the UK be kept in one piece, and if the Scots left would the rest of the country miss them? Panorama talks to the people who could hold the fate of Scotland and the union in their hands, from Alex Salmond to Gordon Brown to David Cameron, and to Tony Blair, the man who began it all by giving the Scots their Parliament."

Note the crack about power being "concentrated" in Scotland. Seems these fools don't even understand the concept of devolution.

Then, lest the impertinence of the title didn't do the trick, they decide to hit the offensiveness jackpot by asserting that the parliament we fought so long and hard to wrest from a doggedly determined Westminster establishment, was actually a "gift" from Tony "Warmonger" Blair.

This is somewhat off-topic, so I have started a thread at www.electrichermit.com for anyone who wants to comment.

67

WL,

Livingston 29/06/2009 15:34:23
If England needs nuclear weapons for its defence then they should keep them in England. Or maybe if England asks nicely they can station them in Wales or Northern Ireland. But Scotland does not want them, and does not want to pay for them either.
68

Electric Hermit,

29/06/2009 15:38:50
43
The Tin Man

"'Nae nukes, unless they're already here' is the brainless 'argument', thank you."

You are the only one airing this "argument". Nobody else would be so stupid.

As so often seems to be the case with ideological unionists, you are locked in an obsession with the past. Despite massive opposition, Trident was based in Scotland. That has happened. It can't be changed. While you live in the past, the rest of us are looking to the future. A future in which foreign WMD are not stockpiled in our country.

Alex Salmond and the Scottish government are representing the majority view of the people of Scotland very well in this matter. The SNP's stance on this will surely win them many more votes at forthcoming UK and Scottish elections. Especially with the help being given by Cameron, the Tory/BLP alliance, and mouthpieces like yourself.

69

Electric Hermit,

29/06/2009 15:43:47
54
mr broon

"...but their problems will really begin, if another Labour/Lib-Dem coalition wins at Holyrood."

Why would that be so? The British Labour Party in Scotland has been working extremely closely with its unionist allies for some time now.

70

Electric Hermit,

29/06/2009 15:49:17
55
The Tin Man

"Is Salmond doing anything about existing, real, actual nuclear weapons in Scotland? No, nothing at all."

Look up the term "fait accompli", you dozy dunce! Salmond is a clever man. But even he can't turn back time and change history.

The existing foreign WMD stockpiled in Scotland will be removed when they become obsolete. The task is to prevent them being replaced with more foreign WMD. Salmond and his team are to be congratulated for taking on this task. There is no way the British Labour Party would have had the guts to challenge their masters in London and Washington.

71

Electric Hermit,

29/06/2009 15:57:33
64
Jerry Springer

"He blew it and Tavish Scott made a monkey of him over it."

For those who prefer the truth to Jerry Springer's blatant lies, see this piece from The Times

Alex Salmond enters summer recess with rivals still on defensive - http://tiny.pl/3vgl

72

Sedov,

29/06/2009 16:51:32
Oh, if only the SNP had the power, now or in the future to get rid of nuclear weapons.

The sad fact is that they will be unable to do this as long as they side with the bosses to bank roll them.

The threat of nuclear weopons is the main armour in its fight against tyranny in the world and the role of the market economy is to protect the interests of capital against all who threaten it. That includes the Souters, the Farmers and the Scottish pretender building the golf course for Alex in Aberdeen

The SNP despite all its handwringing and rhetoric against nuclear weapons and power is part of the system that perpetuates the status quo. They are NOT socialists and do want change.

To acheive real change needs the solidarity of British workers and nationalism creates the opposite.

Apart from being unable to replace the jobs lost as a result of closing down the bases etc, the SNP do not have a complimentary programme of reforms that will provide an alternative to the status quo, for example a massive programme of public works.

As usual with the NATS its all talk - its almost becoming a joke.
73

Alan B,

29/06/2009 18:04:41
#Sedov

More guff from you.

If scotland votes for independence as the snp wants then scotland would not have nuclear weapons.

The truth is that we have nuclear because of your beloved union and the labour party you support who is interested in getting the middle england vote.

As for your rant about capitalism. Most of the eu countries are capitalist they have to be if they are part of the eu and single market and only france and the uk have nuclear. As such it is rubbish.

If scotland vote the way souter wants so we have independence then we will not have nuclear.

So all and all your logic is just as bad as normal.


74

Alan B,

29/06/2009 18:07:04
#Sedov

As for nuclear being a capitalist thing.

The soviet union and china are the 2 communist regimes that have them. India was pretty socialist when it got them.

North Korea is not exactly the hotbead of capitalism.
75

dunedin bully wee 1877,

29/06/2009 18:13:45
64 Rufus

It is not in my interests to have any of your posts deleted.

I am perfectly happy for all your imbecilic posts to remain as a matter of record.

However, your posts do not generally fall into that category, merely tending to exhibit your crass stupidity.
76

Observer,,

Glasgow 29/06/2009 18:26:26
79 Nice sentiments but the working class show no signs of rejecting capitalism, most of them quite like it, so how long do you suggest we wait for that to change ? In the meantime the SNP (who don't claim to be socialists) offer the best policies for those of us that participate in real politics as opposed to theoretical politics.
77

Eve,

Scotland 29/06/2009 18:32:21
As they should.
78

Electric Hermit,

29/06/2009 19:45:29
84
Observer

"In the meantime the SNP (who don't claim to be socialists) offer the best policies for those of us that participate in real politics as opposed to theoretical politics."

Another nail hit firmly on the head.

79

dunedin bully wee 1877,

29/06/2009 20:04:29
84 Observer

Our unionist friends have always found it notoriously difficult to categorise the SNP as being either Socialist or Tory.

The Labourites have for years described the SNP as being Tartan Tories whilst at the same time the Tories were describing them as being as being closet Socialists, (I distinctly remember a Tory election poster during the Thatcher era which simply proclaimed “For a Socialist Scotland vote SNP”.

In truth, the Party have always attracted support from across all shades of the political spectrum, all the way from Marxists to free-marketeers.

Whether or not this broad church appeal can be sustained following Independence is of course a matter of much speculation.

However, the broadly left of centre, social democratic, (some may even say “socialist”) approach taken by the current Government, appears to be generally popular within the electorate, and the SNP appear to be “one set up”.
80

Observer,,

Glasgow 29/06/2009 20:46:44
87 What we vote for when we vote SNP is a chance to govern ourselves. As I trust most of my fellow citizens I am quite happy to do that. I think the SNP (who are not a conventional party) have reached a broadly left of centre social democratic line because that is what the majority of us believe.

I don't think that the SNP as is will continue when we are independent, I think there will be a re-alignment. I will probably support whatever is the main party of the left. But it doesn't matter because whatever party forms the Government will be the one who secures the most votes, and that is nothing to be frightened of as we are not a scary people.
81

ukrefusenik,

under a free flag 30/06/2009 00:35:18
the real fun comes when the tories start to dictate what WILL be done , in a country that not one in a hundred english people "get" . their knowledge of our country is cartoonish , insulting and insensitive . they are pathologically incapable of understanding a non british sensibility .in their liberal broadsheets , i spent ages trying to get them to recognise the existential threat that an independent scotland would pose to their state , their response was more worthy of the lowest of their red-tops . "sweaty sock scroungers couldnt survive without english handouts " they will force us to unite , no bad thing , too
82

Jimmy Neutron,

04/07/2009 19:33:31
take it nobody has tried to get a job rount central scotland? there aint many faslane and the eventual bemise of BP at grangemouth will destroy the area.

just compare the employment figures with a nuclear rich area such as west cumbria and you will see
83

Davex,

05/07/2009 21:06:09
The prime Minister who wants these weapons is Scottish.
84

daveserviceman,

edinburgh 17/07/2009 10:20:57
Yes the Navy can remove trident from scotland and close the navy bases with the loss of jobs in those areas and then move the families to the new base and the areas will suffer a loss of income the the rest of the armed forces will follow and the SNP can pick up the bill for the thousands that will lose their income and livlyhoods from this move, cut your nose off to spite your face if you want too

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.