Jump to content

decomm18

Members
  • Content Count

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

decomm18 last won the day on September 13 2014

decomm18 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

127

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Central Falkirk

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Only the very brave out in Falkirk this morning. All side-streets completely choked up with drifts of snow
  2. There was a red warning for snow, back on Sunday December 19th 2010 - proof! But they're saying this is a 'new system' so perhaps that was the previous system
  3. Callendar Park flats in Falkirk, earlier on between showers. No-one out at all, except me and the dogs. Amazing dry cold, creaky snow, felt almost alpine.
  4. Pretty intense shower on A9 in Perthshire. Chose wrong day to drive daughter back to uni Aberdeen!
  5. Seems that both sides were up to this: I hope that appropriate enquiries include Mr Yousaf as well...
  6. Not quite, SS. Just under 45% of those who voted, so that's 45% of 85%, or just over 38% of the over-15 population. Clearly we can't definitively say what those who didn't bother to vote think about Indy, but surely if they weren't content with the status quo and remaining as part of the union, they'd have joined the ranks of yes supporters?
  7. I'm relieved, that's all. It was the wrong proposition from the politicians, too hurried, poorly considered, with fundamental flaws; and to be honest, letting down those grass-roots activists who worked so hard to support the 'Yes' campaign. There will be lessons to be learned for next time, and they're pretty clear lessons. I feel intense sympathy for everyone who threw themselves into the cause, and see themselves as defeated - but the success of their efforts - and of the No campaign too - is the degree of engagement of the Scottish people that has been achieved over the last month, when the electorate could very easily have become disenchanted and bored by the end of a very long campaign. the amazing turnout underlines this. I've been amazed, and heartened too. There were lots of things from 'yes' that worked wonderfully well. The flaws that there were, which became evident, through the campaign and in retrospect, will all be possible to correct if devo-max (or whatever it is) doesn't deliver, and the Scottish people continue to seek true independence. Interesting times ahead - and hey, we're owed a good winter after last year, when there was almost no snow at all in Falkirk. Hope springs eternal..
  8. I've not voted yet, but will be going later to add to the 'no' tally. Seems to be that upwards of 18% have already voted, and it's barely lunchtime! I've read a lot on social media about voters making a 'journey', mostly in the direction of yes. I haven't done that, but I have moved my stance, particularly in the last couple of months, as the extent of Scottish societal engagement in this referendum has become evident. A year ago I was a hard no - I believed that Scotland would never have the interest to be fully self-governing and to hold its leaders to account appropriately. However, I've changed my view, and now think that if a more careful and managed approach was taken, working with rUK instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, that Independence could and should happen in the medium-term. I still hope fervently for a 'no' this time around. If we get a 'yes' my entire working life will be turned upside down, and not in a good way - this could possibly be skewing my view a little ;-). But if it's a narrow 'no', change - and not just devo max - will come sooner rather than later. If it's the right change, managed in the right way, that will be a good thing for Scotland and the Scots - and for rUK - and it's a change I'll be much happier to embrace.
  9. Andrew, although the last few weeks have been a bit of a shock to very many Scots, who tend to the unemotional and jokey self-deprecating type, I think it's been a good thing, showing us all that we are capable of engagement when it matters enough. But the closing stages of this extraordinary marathon, although dramatic, aren't cataclysmic. Afterwards, whatever happens, I think we'll all roll up the banners and put away the badges and go back to how it was before, in terms of getting on with one another, even those we've fallen out badly with over this. It might be a bit harder after a 'yes' because of the huge changes to be wrought, but again everyone will work together to make it work, as I think our leaders will. Conversely, if it's a 'no', those on the losing side will I think be disappointed and resigned (Scots are very good at losing, after all ;-)), but also - the activists at least - looking to the future to prepare for next time. There will be a next time, and I don't think all of these youngsters newly engaged by the events of 2014, will be prepared to wait the 'generation' suggested by AS. And I for one will look forward to next time. I might even be on the 'yes' side
  10. You and I are as one on this, CMD. As I posted several dozen pages back, I think Scottish independence should happen, but just in a more objective, planned and collaborative way, enabling preparation on both sides of the border, and a more considered approach to what we should be sharing long-term for the best for all parties. I think a small no win will deliver that, in the end, and both sides will - i hope - have learned lessons from what's happened since 2011. I hate this oppositional approach to politics, which has spilled over into this referendum and messed things up good and proper. A long timescale with a clear timetable to full economic independence and a proper partnership of equals - and a properly independent Scotland by 2025 - would tick all of my boxes.
  11. It's not the Telegraph - it's ex-Naval people writing to the Telegraph. And sorry, not opinions, but fact. Something the white paper's short on
  12. I'm not happy, in fact I'm quite sad November, I was just passing Carstairs when I first posted, and about ten minutes out from Glasgow the second time. And those Virgin trains can be quite fast ;-). Now you'll be accusing me of speeding along the motorway to Glasgow because I'm now back in Falkirk. Faslane could be used to base-port a conventional naval force, no problem, although berthing-space would be an issue if the SDF got as much as it seems to expect to get (and we can argue about that too). What it's in no way suitable for is the back-office functions required to act - as is stated - as the 'HQ' of the SDF. There's not much office-space, and the site is very sloping making new-build hideously expensive. The new quarters built to house submariners was eye-wateringly over budget, and is already falling apart due to the lovely weather over there. No parking to speak of, not enough flat ground for stores and other support-functions, and a large number of specialist buildings that would need knocked down and (in some cases) expensively decommissioned. The costs will run into tens of millions, actually make that hundreds. Then there's the fact that it's so far away from the motorway network, and seat of government. Then there's the other fact that most of Scotland's assets are in the north sea, and who wants to go round the top of the country whenever you need to get to work? Any sensible consideration would have had them put the HQ at Rosyth, where it's handy for Holyrood and the existing infrastructure is far better suited to creating huge offices and stores. In any case, most of the jobs which would supposedly be created by siting the SDF HQ on the Clyde are of far lower quality than the specialist engineering support tasks currently carried out. No need for electrical, civil, nuclear engineers, no need for safety-case specialists. These are all civilian jobs, carried out by highly-trained personnel, and it supports a large training programme for apprentices as well. Don't tell me that renewables will fill that gap - it won't; and your average skilled safety engineer doesn't want to retrain as a pay-clerk. Our ambitious youngsters will need to go south in even larger numbers than they now do to get the jobs they want, and we'll lose still more of the engineering excellence that made - and still makes - Scotland great. The Clyde as it currently operates has a long-term future, and will continue to employ current levels of quality personnel into the distance Don't just take my word for it - try these guys http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11093397/Naval-chiefs-Scottish-independence-will-do-immense-damage-to-Forces.html
  13. Sorry November, on a train going through borders, so pretty flakey connection. You could say that I've got a 'working knowledge' of the subject. . Do you doubt me?
  14. No, nothing stopping a small naval presence being there - it's the proposal to use it for the HQ of the SDF that's barking for all of the reasons I gave. The west coast isn't the obvious place to base the navy, even because the main assets we're protecting are in the north sea, and our NATO support role will focus on the north sea as well. Nothing to do with shipbuilding. There's even an existing ammunitioning depot at Crombie on the Forth. Sorry I can't be positive, and perhaps that's because there's absolutely nothing to be positive about in the White Paper, in the defence section at least. Just a lot of hot air that disappears as soon as you examine it with any understanding of the subject.
×
×
  • Create New...