Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Scottish independence: the thorny issue of defence comes back to haunt the SNP as a new report says indy is a risk to security and jobs, English SNP MP Angus Robertson couldn’t successfully defend a hut in a paintball game, omnishambles again for Nationalists

Dear All

Just as a good case could be made for Scottish independence, so can a good case be made for staying part of the United Kingdom.

However, although independence is a just cause, there is a little bit more to it than just the concept, you have to look closely at the calibre of the people behind it.

A think tank has come up with the conclusion that a Scottish defence force would be "less comprehensive and effective" than the UK armed forces.

Is that true as a statement?

The answer is yes, Scotland couldn’t compete with the UK defence force in terms of logistics, personnel, quality of training and opportunities.

The latter is of particular interest to young working Scots looking to have a career, the Forces isn’t just about fighting, although that is their business!

In me yoof, I used to train up Glasgow University students for the military, everyone I taught went on to become an Officer.

100% track record.

One of the “division” even told me of his “success” of shagging a bird in the showers at Sandhurst!

Apparently a “hero” at breakfast the next morning, which begs the question regarding the thickness of the walls in that place!

Love will find a way!

The Scotland Institute said in a report that Scotland would have to rely on a scaled-back defence force, this is true; many opportunities which are available to young Scots will not be available in the forces of an independent Scotland.

The Institute suggests that Alex’s Army would struggle to recruit and retain personnel, with the additional and untimely detrimental knock-on effect on jobs and economic growth. Previously I blogged on the need to adopt NATO, the cybernats on Newsnet Scotland attacked me, then the SNP went NATO, presumably they are all NATO supporters now the sycophantic bastards.

As well as NATO, the SNP has to commit to keeping Faslane as a nuclear submarine based, it is in Scotland’s interests, and importantly guarantees sovereignty and membership of NATO. Also if the Scottish Government doesn’t wish to be a holder of nuclear weapons that is fine, but when the rain falls it is better to be under the nuclear umbrella.

Defence and Security of an Independent Scotland is a big deal, however the SNP treated defence as a joke, they couldn’t be arsed doing the work, and as we have seen by Angus Robertson’s announcements, the copying of the UK defence plan for Scotland isn’t good enough.

And the embarrassment of him being nailed to wall over the Scottish Navy requirements shows how lacking in talent the senior SNP actually is, however, we should remember that Englishman Angus Robertson said that the Norwegian Navy have a good website.

Thank fuck for that, that will be useful in times of attack, we can post pictures of big ships and submarines to frighten potential attackers away. 

The report by the panel including senior armed-forces personnel, defence academics, former secretaries of defence and senior officials from the MOD, Nato and the EU.

And we have Angus Robertson!

The chairman of the panel is Major-General Andrew Mackay CBE, who commanded a task force in Afghanistan and served in the army for 27 years, he wrote in the foreword:

"I cannot see how slicing up a competent and well-established military will aid either the United Kingdom or an independent Scotland. Indeed I see very real risks to the people of Scotland, be it from the loss of jobs and the local economic impact that the inevitable removal of the Faslane naval base would bring, the huge costs necessary to start building the armed forces from afresh, the loss of access to sensitive intelligence materials and the inevitable dilution in the quality and number of the armed forces of this small island, which to date have had such a profound effect upon the course of world events."

The report also suggests that a post-independence Scotland would be more vulnerable to terrorist and cyber attack.

Is that true?

Well, the SNP plan to allow mass immigration and despite a rather vocal online presence with their cybernats, it is doubtful whether they could defend Scotland in a physical or virtual sense.

Labour's shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy MP, said:

"The report shows the SNP's plans to be fundamentally flawed”.

SNP defence spokesman Angus Robertson said independence would protect defence jobs and stop "Whitehall making bad decisions on our behalf".

Well, a huge statement, but like much of what Englishman Angus Robertson says it is just hot air, bluster and assumption.

How is he going to protect military shipbuilding orders on the River Clyde?

He can’t, he has no power over whether Westminster would place warship contracts in the highly unlikely event of a Yes vote.

As to bad decisions, he speaks for a future Labour Government or possible non SNP coalition sending Scottish Troops into active operational areas?

He can’t.

In fact Englishman Angus Robertson can promise to protect Scots but the reality is, he couldn’t defend a hut in a paintball game.

In finishing his rant, Scots were treated to an increasing old story from the Scottish National Party of grudge, grievance and malcontent:

"Personnel numbers in Scotland are at a record low after disproportionate cuts compared to the rest of the UK, and Scottish taxpayers contribute far more to the UK defence budget than is actually spent in Scotland."

Sorry Angus I would rather financial resources where best deployed to protect Soldiers on the front line, perhaps you should care more about that rather than whether a few quid is spent in Scotland's backyard.

And before I forget, when exactly was the last time that Alex Salmond as the First Minister of Scotland visited Scottish Troops in the field?

Probably never!

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

1 comment:

Abdul Salaam Ghani said...

Great response to the cybernats attacking the report from one of its authors. He rips them a new one: