Former NATO general secretary Lord Robertson has warned it is vital for NATO to prevent Scotland’s secession from the United Kingdom, saying it would be “cataclysmic” for the entire planet, and ruinous for the alliance.
Lord Robertson, who was a Defence Secretary during Tony Blair’s government, went on to claim Scottish secession would be cheered loudly by the enemies of Britain, and would amount to a dramatic victory for the “forces of darkness.”
He also warned Scotland would not be allowed to join NATO as an independent nation because of its opposition to nuclear weapons, saying NATO would never accept an anti-nuke member.
That position seems unlikely, since Germany is a member in NATO and has similarly been fighting tooth and nail to get the US to remove nuclear weapons from their territory. The anti-nuke stance is growing among European members, and Scotland would just be one more of them.
On the other hand it isn’t clear what NATO membership would get Scotland, since their only border is with England, who they are seceding from. Its only other close neighbor, Ireland, is actually a good example of why Scotland doesn’t need NATO, an independent power which has avoided getting sucked into most major modern wars.
Northern Ireland is a good example of why Scotland doesn’t need the United Kingdom.
NATO nations seem to be good at standing around with their thumbs up their butts watching U.S. neocons provoke unnecessary, expensive, dangerous, and destructive conflicts for NATO to participate in. Small wonder the Scots aren't much worried about being excluded from that club.
NATO nations seem to be good at standing around with their thumbs up their butts watching U.S. neocons provoke unnecessary, expensive, dangerous, and destructive conflicts for NATO nations to participate in. Small wonder the Scots aren't much worried about being excluded from that club.
If only we could bottle and sell Lord Robertson's hyperbole, we could retire the world's debt.
What a putz.
Geee, Mr Robertson sounds desperately. Is Scottish will to become an independent nation so strong? I really hope, just to save Mr. Robertson from shame for being alarmist and with little faith for Great Britain. Or even to look like a fool. On the other hand I do understand his worries. What will be Great Britain called after Scottish secession? Would it be a Small Britain? Or Middle Britain? or maybe just Britain?
The 'small Britain' was the portion of France that had been joined politically with the island now known as "Great Britain" centuries ago. This is one of those situations where we've called a place X for such a long time that we forget why.
There's a near-zero chance of Scotland voting for independence according to polling; a slight but decisive & steady majority has been against the idea for the past couple of years consistently & if anything the independence side has lost a couple of % points to the "not sures."
Ironically the anti-nuke stance is one of the stronger arguments for the independence movement, and if Robertson keeps flogging it he might get his anti-wish! Geez people when you're winning leave well enough alone… ah yes but NATO has trouble with exactly that, don't they?
So the Scots can vote, rather than have to fight, for independence, and nays are in the lead? Wallace is spinning in his grave. For shame.
Isn't that a contradiction! NATO is so intent on keeping NATO nations welded together while at the same time it is busily trying to break non-NATO nations apart. Or destroy them.
The English were so opposed to the secession of the American colonies that we had to fight a war with them to prove we deserved it. Apparently they're still that much afraid of liberty they would claim the world will fall apart if Scotland gains her own freedom, too. What's with the English that they yet consider themselves free, but still yet call themselves "subjects?" Watch out, Scotland. England may yet send redcoats.
Ireland is not in NATO, and has a tiny military.
…ah, reading comprehension – a lost art.
Ireland has fought no war with anyone since leaving the United Kingdom. This alone is probably the strongest argument in favor of independence.
Scotland should stay truly independent and entangle itself with NATO, the EU or UN.
*and NOT entangle itself*
I don’t know where people are getting the idea that the polls are showing “almost zero” chance of independence happening. The polls have been continually moving in our favour for the past few months, and the race is now all but neck and neck. A 3pt swing over 5 months would be enough, according to the most recent polling evidence.
This article in The Scotsman is from April 10. http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories…
We see 35-39% solid independence support and 45-48% solidly against. There has been a consistent lead of 10-15% against independence for the past couple of years of polling. The independence side needs the overwhelming majority of "I don't knows" and the union side needs just a tiny amount to put them over the top.
What's interesting to me is that when we've had similar referendums in places like Crimea, South Sudan, East Timor, Namibia, etc. & the votes are 95-99% in favor of independence. I can't imagine a place that struggles to get 40% independence support in a poll actually voting to become independent. There's even talk of keeping the pound, so how 'independent' would that make Scotland of Westminster in any event..?