(17-03-2017 19:02 )Lord Rockingham Wrote: [ -> ]So what planet were you living on at the time then?
If you didn't notice that the NO campaign focused on the EU more than anything you must have been away somewhere at the time.
Either that or the above comment is just plain stupidity on your part.
Planet England, the Scotish referendum didn't concern me so i had absolutely no reason to read their propaganda; either sides.
However, the UK WAS in the EU and, AT THE TIME, there was no indication it would not be.
Now that the UK IS LEAVING the EU, your sturgeon wants Scotland to BECOME INDEPENDANT so Scotland CAN APPLY to be in the EU as an INDEPENDANT country.
Yet your telling me that a scare tactic that Scotland would not be able to join the EU outside of the UK was used to make sure that Scotland voted to remain part of the UK and thereby remain in the EU.
You really need to think about what your saying here; talking of stupidity, there's all manner of stupidity going down here with this reasoning.
As an outsider, the vote would more than likely be that of nationalism, some may have considered other issues such as the EU. I'm not talking about what propaganda one side or the other was pushing but what your individual Scot was more than likely thinking; that is, do they want to be part of a United Kingdom that has existed since James the first (or there abouts) or disolve this and be totally independant of Westminster
Did the UK voters who voted out of the EU vote over an indepth analysis of the the finantial, political, economic position, or, bollocks to brussels telling use what to do, and too many foreigners coming over here taking our jobs and women?
It was never English vs Scots or English Vs Ireland, it was always one Scot against another Scot, highland Scots against Lowland Scots or Republican Irish against Unionist Irish and that nationalist shit goes deeper than whether they should be in the EU or not.
Just easier to vent on the English.
(17-03-2017 20:44 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]Yet your telling me that a scare tactic that Scotland would not be able to join the EU outside of the UK was used to make sure that Scotland voted to remain part of the UK and thereby remain in the EU.
If you weren't so ignorant you'd know this already without anyone needing to explain it for you.
(17-03-2017 20:44 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]SNIP
...do they want to be part of a United Kingdom that has existed since James the first (or there abouts) or disolve this and be totally independant of Westminster
FYI, the Union of the Crowns, where James VI of Scotland ascended to the thrones of England and Ireland, was in 1603; the Treaty of Union, which joined Scotland and England politically, was in 1707; The UK (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) was not formed until 1801, so you were only 200 years (or 'there abouts') off the mark.
(18-03-2017 00:27 )Censorship :-( Wrote: [ -> ]FYI, the Union of the Crowns, where James VI of Scotland ascended to the thrones of England and Ireland, was in 1603; the Treaty of Union, which joined Scotland and England politically, was in 1707; The UK (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) was not formed until 1801, so you were only 200 years (or 'there abouts') off the mark.
Yes, I do know, hence the 'there abouts'.
And even if I didn't know you do realise there is wiki and google? mmmmmkay.
I just like seeing how you childish types fall over one another to say how stooopid I am, with rammy and others running around thanking.
But back then it was a monacy so James the 6 was James the first of England - same monarch reigned over both which essetially meant the two countries were indeed joined and that's the two we are talking about, not the other unimportant ones.
(17-03-2017 22:11 )tony confederate Wrote: [ -> ]If you weren't so ignorant you'd know this already without anyone needing to explain it for you.
So why don't you explain to me ignorant self. It's been a consistant thing that when I point something out, you people always sqwuak on about my being stoopid but never really explain why, just keep coming up with excuses why not to.
Like I pointed out, I'm English and couldn't give a flying fig if Scotland became independent or not and had zero interest about it at the time, bye bye off you go says I.
But, it's been brought up here. You will note I have posted very little (maybe three posts) on the Scotish referendum thread, due to lack of interest in it.
Reading what has been put here, it would seem that the Scotish no people where astonishingly psychic since, apparently, their mian argument against leaving the UK was so they didn't loose memebership of the EU, that is exactly what has been claimed. Personally, I didn't know there was going to be a referendum until it happened, so jolly well done them for knowing 2 years previously.
So it is claimed that the Scots voted to stay as part of the UK to preserve their membership of the EU, no other issue than that - apparently.
Yet now, your Sturgeon is wanting to dissolve the UK so that Westminster does not take Scotland out of the EU.
Eh? what and wait.
If you can't see where that is a completely totally opposite argument in all aspects, then I supose you don't.
You are quite free to illuminate me if you so wish, or just keep saying ignorant, stoopid etc blah blah blah.
(18-03-2017 01:10 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ] (18-03-2017 00:27 )Censorship :-( Wrote: [ -> ]FYI, the Union of the Crowns, where James VI of Scotland ascended to the thrones of England and Ireland, was in 1603; the Treaty of Union, which joined Scotland and England politically, was in 1707; The UK (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) was not formed until 1801, so you were only 200 years (or 'there abouts') off the mark.
Yes, I do know, hence the 'there abouts'.
Really?
Everything you've posted contradicts this assertion.
(18-03-2017 01:10 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]And even if I didn't know you do realise there is wiki and google? mmmmmkay.
Perhaps you should check them out - you might learn something?
(18-03-2017 01:10 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]SNIP
But back then it was a monacy so James the 6 was James the first of England - same monarch reigned over both which essetially meant the two countries were indeed joined and that's the two we are talking about, not the other unimportant ones.
So, 'joined' equals UK, does it?
You do realise that just because you assert something, it doesn't make it true; we are, after all, talking about actual history, or do you not let trifling matters, such as facts, get in the way of a good ramble?
(18-03-2017 01:28 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ] (17-03-2017 22:11 )tony confederate Wrote: [ -> ]If you weren't so ignorant you'd know this already without anyone needing to explain it for you.
SNIP
Reading what has been put here, it would seem that the Scotish no people where astonishingly psychic since, apparently, their mian argument against leaving the UK was so they didn't loose memebership of the EU, that is exactly what has been claimed. Personally, I didn't know there was going to be a referendum until it happened, so jolly well done them for knowing 2 years previously.
So it is claimed that the Scots voted to stay as part of the UK to preserve their membership of the EU, no other issue than that - apparently.
Yet now, your Sturgeon is wanting to dissolve the UK so that Westminster does not take Scotland out of the EU.
Eh? what and wait.
If you can't see where that is a completely totally opposite argument in all aspects, then I supose you don't.
You are quite free to illuminate me if you so wish, or just keep saying ignorant, stoopid etc blah blah blah.
OK, lets have (yet) another go at this:
The No campaign said that the only way to guarantee Scotland's place in the EU was to remain part of the UK.
The Yes campaign said that the only threat to Scotland's place in the EU was to remain part of UK.
At this stage, an EU referendum was part of the Tories European Election manifesto.
Any clearer, now?
(17-03-2017 14:53 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ] (17-03-2017 06:24 )The Silent Majority Wrote: [ -> ]Wrong. One of the main planks of the No campaign was, the only sure way for Scotland to remain in the EU is to vote No.
It was one of the main reasons I voted No.
I'm pretty certain that membership of the EU would not have been to the fore
Wrong
(17-03-2017 14:53 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]Scotland could apply to be part of the EU as an independant country -
Nobody in the EU would give any guarantees Scotland would be accepted anytime soon, Spain being the main veto-er because of Catalonia.
(18-03-2017 01:28 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]Like I pointed out, I'm English and couldn't give a flying fig if Scotland became independent or not and had zero interest about it at the time
And yet you're so arrogant you think you know better than the people who lived through the campaign and voted on it.
(18-03-2017 01:28 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]So it is claimed that the Scots voted to stay as part of the UK to preserve their membership of the EU, no other issue than that - apparently.
Bullshit. Nobody anywhere has made that claim.
(18-03-2017 03:08 )Censorship :-( Wrote: [ -> ]Snip
Well done. I was going to have a stab at that bit, but I couldn't decipher it.
(17-03-2017 20:44 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]Yet your telling me that a scare tactic that Scotland would not be able to join the EU outside of the UK was used to make sure that Scotland voted to remain part of the UK and thereby remain in the EU.
Absolutely 110%
YES.
Try and get your head round what you're being told, from people who were actually involved in the referendum (both sides).