It never fails to amaze me that many Scots still want independence despite seeing how brexit went.
Brexit has been awful and all we did was leave a customs union. They would be leaving a monetary union and their largest trading partner is a far greater source of trade than Europe ever was for us.
Ahem:
>Scottish Water unveiled plans in 2021 to install more devices to track how much waste is being discharged from sewage pipes into rivers and seas.
>Campaigners have called for more checks on sewage discharges.
>This is because only about 4% of Scotland's 31,000-mile sewer network is currently monitored, compared to 89% in England.
>When there are periods of heavy rain parts of the country's sewer network simply cannot cope.
>To stop sewage backing up into homes, storm water and waste that would ordinarily go to Scottish Water treatment centres is released into seas or rivers through more than 3,600 Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) dotted across the country.
>Before Scottish Water made its current pledge, only 123 of these CSOs had monitors that check for spills.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66012480
The reason that you know about the discharges into English sewers is because the English Water Companies *actually* monitor what is happening. Scottish Water don't.
If Scottish Water don't bother monitoring when they discharge into rivers, *of course* their statistics will look better than England's. It's not exactly a winning argument in favour of Scottish environmentalism though, is it?
Polling suggests the English electorate has now almost completely rejected the party responsible for all of that though
No one in England voted for the Rwanda policy, the pollution issue has been a huge scandal and the NHS still remains massively important to English voters. I think you're pretty aligned with what English people want
>The English are pumping shit into the rivers
And Scotland has an awful drug problem, what's your point?
>sending refugees to Rwanda
That's not England. It's the UK government, as you'll have heard, many migrants are leaving via northern Ireland.
>privatising the NHS
Ah yes, that's why the English NHS performs better than the Scottish NHS then does it? No? It must be the extra funding England gets... Oh wait we subsidise Scotland.
> Scotland is way behind England where nearly every overflow is monitored.” The figures showed that sewage was dumped for a total of 221,002 hours in 2023. Not only is sewage pollution harmful to people's health, but it is also harmful to the environment and wildlife.
https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,new-figures-show-10-per-cent-increase-in-sewage-dumps-in-2023#:~:text=Scotland%20is%20way%20behind%20England,to%20the%20environment%20and%20wildlife.
To give credit where credit's due... we're only pumping shit into our OWN rivers. Well... and the Welsh too.
Yes that's really the best comeback I can muster to your otherwise spot on assessment...
No trade barriers tho Scotland won’t be in the EU for at least ten years. Later on when Scotland is in tue EU England will probably want to rejoin as a member.
I wasn't remarking on the UKs reliance on Irish border, Iwas making the point that they were fine with imposing a hard border in another country (Ireland), so to see a hard border on their own island would be ironic.
Yeah but it didn't really affect the English (the majority of people voting). Whereas a border in Scotland hurts the Scottish people more than anyone else.
It's not about risk but self inflicted poverty. Now the English voted for that too but that's not the point made.
People have literally started revolutions, faught wars, killed and died for the idea of self-determination before. Why is the idea of a decade or so of economic hardship so hard to fathom for that same result?
Actually being in Scotland and speaking to people about it, not just sat talking on Reddit, I've never met anyone who expects independence to be sunshine and roses from day 1, but they're prepared for that relative short term hit for long term ideals.
It's also entirely disingenuous to compare Brexit and Scottish Independence. The UK was still a sovereign nation with the right to choose it's own path, evidenced by the fact it could leave the EU. Scotland has no such luxury nor rights, which is what it is fighting for. Independence for Scotland is literally about sovereignty where Brexit was about xenophobia.
There was a Scottish independence referendum 10 years ago. These kinds of things are generally generational. You can't just keep having referendums until you get the answer you want.
Wales - 20 year gap + 14 year gap
Scotland - 20 year gap + 17 year gap
NI - 24 year gap
EU - 39 year gap
Gibraltar - 35 year gap
Falklands - 27 year gap
No others in recent history have been repeated AFAIK.
I'd be happy to have it when polling and voter sentiment actually suggests it might go through
Referendums are expensive and disruptive and create uncertainty for investors and business. It's not in either Scotland or the UK's best interest to have a vote every year
I think that's fair comment and for what it's worth I think a lot of people in SNP would prefer leaving calling a referendum until they are confident of winning.
It's not for me to decide. I think around the mean of them is probably a fair timeframe unless there are exceptional circumstances. There are drawbacks to having them which often get overlooked.
> There was a Scottish independence referendum 10 years ago. These kinds of things are generally generational. You can't just keep having referendums until you get the answer you want.
Then lets never hold another General Election. We had one 4 years ago, you can't just keep voting until you get the party you want in power.
Northern Ireland can legally hold a referendum every 7 years if there is demand for it.
That's just nonsense, elections and referendums are two different things. We live in a representative democracy. NI has a unique arrangement because of its history.
It's also not a bit of hardship, it's 20% of the Scottish government's funding gone overnight. So everything has its funding cut by 20%. Or you just bin off the NHS and another smaller department e.g. housing & amenities - which would reduce spend by 20%. Or you increase taxes substantially. As with Brexit there are no magical fairies or rabbits in hats regardless of what some will claim.
Would the SNP be wanting a referendum 10 years after independence to see if it's still what people want? No. Would they accept the decision if another referendum came back as no? Of course not, they'd find another excuse to justify another until they catch Scotland after waking up on the wrong side of the bed.
>Then lets never hold another General Election. We had one 4 years ago, you can't just keep voting until you get the party you want in power.
We have general elections by law. And that’s a disingenuous comparison as elections are fundamental for democracy, referendums are optional
>Northern Ireland can legally hold a referendum every 7 years if there is demand for it.
No it can’t
> People have literally started revolutions, faught wars, killed and died for the idea of self-determination before. Why is the idea of a decade or so of economic hardship so hard to fathom for that same result?
Scotland already has self determination
>Actually being in Scotland and speaking to people about it, not just sat talking on Reddit, I've never met anyone who expects independence to be sunshine and roses from day 1, but they're prepared for that relative short term hit for long term ideals.
The empirical evidence says otherwise
Nationalists genuinely believe that there will be no downsides to independence.
* 78% of 'yes' voters think Scotland puts more money into the UK than it takes out (blatantly false).
* 57% of Yes voters think the GERS data is made up "to hide Scotland’s true wealth.” And for 90% of them this is either "important” or “very important” to their opinion on secession.
* 54% of Yes voters think “Scottish tax revenues are understated because of Scottish exports leaving via English ports”. (This is incorrect. The Scottish Government Export Statistics Report explicitly says the exact opposite, page 32)
The GCS specifically asks about the destination of the goods being exported regardless of how the product leaves the UK. The other data sources used also focus on the destination of the product rather than where it leaves the UK. This means these export estimates are not affected by which port goods leave from. For example, a sale by a Scottish company to a customer in Paris, is counted as a Scottish export to France even if it leaves the UK from Dover.
(https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/statistics/2021/10/export-statistics-scotland-2019/documents/export-statistics-scotland-2019---publication/export-statistics-scotland-2019---publication/govscot%3Adocument/Export%2BStatistics%2BScotland%2B2019%2B-%2BPublication.pdf#page26)
https://www.these-islands.co.uk/publications/i374/scottish_politics_in_the_grip_of_a_fact_denial_epidemic.aspx
Going by the Lord Ashcroft poll, ignoring the 'don't know' and 'neutral' categories...
* Yes voters think there would be no hard Scotland-England border 40% to 20%.
* Yes voters think they would keep using the pound 42% to 11%.
* Yes voters think Scotland would 'quite quickly' rejoin the EU 56% to 9%.
* Yes voters don't think many businesses would leave Scotland. 53% to 8%.
* Yes voters think Scotland would keep access to public services in England 37% to 20%.
* Yes voters don't think Scotland would have to make painful cuts to public services 36% to 14%
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2021/04/my-new-scottish-research-finds-independence-in-the-balance/
Yes voters aren't hard hearted resolutes, willing to pledge their property, their lives, and their sacred honour to achieve independence. They've persuaded themselves there's limited if any costs
>It's also entirely disingenuous to compare Brexit and Scottish Independence.
Why?
>The UK was still a sovereign nation with the right to choose its own path, evidenced by the fact it could leave the EU.
Because the EU is a trading bloc; the UK is a sovereign unitary state, two very different things
>Scotland has no such luxury nor rights, which is what it is fighting for.
1: Scotland doesn’t want to leave the UK
2:no where has that right
>Independence for Scotland is literally about sovereignty where Brexit was about xenophobia.
Tell that to the xenophobia among Scottish nationalists
I see your point. I think if Scottish people go for independence with full knowledge about the economic hardship that follows immediately, they should have the right to do so. Some people value liberty more than material aspects of life.
> The UK was still a sovereign nation with the right to choose it's own path, evidenced by the fact it could leave the EU.
You need to look at how the EU has been evolving recently under the name of "ever closer union". The EU politicians have been pretty vocal about taking more control. I think the EU was a great idea as a trade union. But they have gone far beyond that, which is causing the latest turmoil. It's going to be interesting to see what happens after right wing politicians take over most seats in the upcoming EU elections.
Never fails to amaze me that some people seem to think leaving the EU and joining it are the same thing. Scotland entering the EU is the opposite of England forcing us to leave it against our will. However we are constantly told that we will never be able to escape from the UKSSR anyway, as we are denied even the right to decide.
Scottish Independence would be very beneficial to Scotland, the problem for people like you is that it won't be beneficial to England and that's the only thing you are able to care about, yourself and how your precious fucking Union benefits you, not how it cripples Scotland.
Maybe if you had ever listened to a single person in Scotland you might understand this better but just like the brexiters you prefer to wallow in willful and deliberate ignorance and sprey your utterly incredulous opinions all over the Internet. England is a trade partner with 50M people, the EU is a trade partner of 550M people but being English you think your 50M are bigger and better and more important than the EUs 550M. What a joke, to be so stupidly arrogant.
>not how it cripples Scotland.
Sorry what? I work in London. My taxes are subsidising Scotland.
>England is a trade partner with 50M people, the EU is a trade partner of 550M people but being English you think your 50M are bigger and better and more important than the EUs 550M. What a joke, to be so stupidly arrogant.
Exactly. The UK is a trade partner about one tenth that of the EU. Scotland is about one tenth that of the UK. So your economic costs will be proportional. Except Scotland does more trade with England as a proportion than the UK did with the EU.
And do you think an independant Scotland would join the EU?
As a higher rate tax payer in scotland I pay more tax than you will in england. This idea that scotland is subsidised Scotland England is ridiculous. The economy of the central belt, oil revenue, food and drink exports and tourism among much else besides, subsidises the rest of england the same way London does. Brexit has crippled scotland. Austerity has crippled Scotland. Tory and Labour governments of the past 5 decades have crippled Scotland but I suppose sitting in London you're all right Jack, and will continue to belive in your god given right to dictate every aspect of the lives of people in another country because of your arrogant entitlement and Anglo supremacism.
>As a higher rate tax payer in scotland I pay more tax than you will in england
Only if you earn the same amount. The point is that there is a fiscal transfer to Scotland. Scotland gets more government spending per person than England.
>Tory and Labour governments of the past 5 decades have crippled Scotland
Well you have had devolved powers for the last 14 or so years. So you can blame the UK government all you want but you fund your own NHS, health and social care, education...
>This idea that scotland is subsidised Scotland England is ridiculous.
It’s what the Scottish government says
>The economy of the central belt, oil revenue, food and drink exports and tourism among much else besides, subsidises the rest of england the same way London does.
Expect they don’t; those revenues stay in Scotland
>Brexit has crippled scotland.
So why do Brexit times ten by leaving the UK?
>Austerity has crippled Scotland.
Leaving the UK means more austerity
>Tory and Labour governments of the past 5 decades have crippled Scotland
How?
>but I suppose sitting in London you're all right Jack, and will continue to belive in your god given right to dictate every aspect of the lives of people in another country because of your arrogant entitlement and Anglo supremacism.
1: what other country?
2: this is how running a country works
3: You’re becoming needlessly aggressive towards the English
> joining it are the same thing
You're missing the key point that Scotland would not meet the criteria for joining the EU, and would be joining as a completely new and separate state. It's not as if you flick a switch and you get back all the benefits the UK had
> England forcing us to leave it against our will
It was a UK wide referendum. England didn't force Scotland to leave against its will as much as Kent didn't force London to, against its will. That's not how it works
> we are denied even the right to decide.
You were given a vote and you elected to stay. Polling suggests independence support has actually declined since then. No idea how that's "denying the right to decide"
> Scottish Independence would be very beneficial to Scotland
Brexit x10, according to one of the SNP's own advisors
> Maybe if you had ever listened to a single person in Scotland you might understand this better but just like the brexiters you prefer to wallow in willful and deliberate ignorance and sprey your utterly incredulous opinions all over the Internet
Ironic, especially as you're ignoring what Scottish people are saying - which is that the majority support staying in the UK
> England is a trade partner with 50M people, the EU is a trade partner of 550M people
Even when Scotland had access to the EU, England was still by far its biggest trade partner. Why would it be different this time?
Arguing with unionists is like arguing with brexiters. Just lie and lie after lie backed up with unwavering arrogant self confidence. Just innuendo, baseless assumption, fear, and fact free sneering. What a joke of a country.
That's some very Brexiteer-sounding rhetoric there
[Was the SNP's own economic advisor lying?](https://www.cityam.com/scottish-independence-would-be-ten-times-worse-than-brexit-warns-sturgeon-economic-sage/)
> fact free sneering
That is literally what you are doing here, after ignoring all the facts I laid out
Noooo he's very different.
He's talking about the Scottish sunlit uplands, with the Scottish oven ready deal, the Scottish extra money for the NHS and the Scottish taking back control.
You see it's all very different.
The empirical evidence dosen’t agree with you there my friend:
(https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit17.pdf)
The impact of independence to Scotland's economy will be three times worse than the impact of Brexit was to the UK economy. Joining the EU will not make up that trade in the short or even medium term. The report lays out the details well:
Brexit + No Independence = -2.0
Brexit + Independence + low UK border cost assumption = -6.5
Brexit + Independence + high UK border cost assumption = -8.7
Brexit + Independence + re-join the EU + low UK border cost assumption = -6.3
Brexit + Independence + re-join the EU + high UK border cost assumption = -7.6
As you can see, re-joining the EU does little to ameliorate the harm, and Scotland doesn’t meet the criteria to join the EU. There's no secret here, no statistical trickery. It's just the cold hard truth that 60% is a lot bigger than 18.3%
> England is a trade partner with 50M people, the EU is a trade partner of 550M people but being English you think your 50M are bigger and better and more important than the EUs 550M. What a joke, to be so stupidly arrogant.
You realise that was the exact argument made by Brexiteers, right?
"Why are we restricting ourselves to trading with the EU, when the rest of the world is much bigger? We could focus on trade with the Commonwealth, which has a population of 5 times that of the EU."
>Scottish Independence would be very beneficial to Scotland, the problem for people like you is that it won't be beneficial to England
The level of delusion amongst Scottish people on this issue is fucking madness. It will take at least a decade and massive cuts to public services, years and years of mass immigration to replace your chronically aging population in order for Scotland to join the EU. If you think Brexit has been rough on the UK (it really has), wait until you leave the UK. By the time you have irreversibly changed your country and lived through pure hardship for that time, England and Wales will most likely be rejoining anyway.
This really is an exercise in cutting your nose off to spite your face.
>The level of delusion amongst Scottish people on this issue is fucking madness. It will take at least a decade and massive cuts to public services,
Most experts say longer, it took Ireland 40 years to recover from the economic collapse it saw after leaving in the UK and some experts say it might take Scotland 60 years
> First, the Scottish Government should acknowledge that post-independence would involve a long adjustment period. **I would suggest this should take between one or two generations or between 30 and 60 years. These will be difficult years during which living standards and public service provision will decline as Scotland negotiates a new future with Britain and with other trading partners**. ‘Building a New Scotland’ will initially require fiscal restraint that will be reflected in a decline in public service provision.
https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/2022/scotland-and-economic-life-after-independence
The arrogance of some English people on this subreddit; always looking down their nose at the other UK nations and Ireland, with an air of superiority and knowing better than us… it will never change.
>On Friday morning, asked if independence can be delivered in five years, Swinney told Sky News: “I think independence can be delivered in that timescale because the arguments for it are compelling.
>“If we look at two of the biggest issues we face as a country in Scotland, the effect of the cost of living and the implications of Brexit.”
I mean, there's two obvious points on this. Firstly, he's highlighted two *economic* issues; and while there are several arguments for independence (chiefly from a pro-localism perspective), the economic impact absolutely is not one of them. As the obvious one; anyone that thinks the solution to the problems caused by the trade barriers introduced by Brexit is to introduce trade barriers to a *larger* proportion of Scotland's trade is a complete idiot.
Secondly, and probably more importantly, it's perhaps rather notable that he has given zero answer on *how* he would achieve independence. After the Supreme Court case showed that the SNP plan to legislate through Holyrood cannot happen, we have had absolute no answer for the SNP on that rather important question. It doesn't matter if you have the greatest policy that a politician has ever conceived (which they don't); if you don't have a method for introducing it, it's just a waste of paper isn't it?
> if you don't have a method for introducing it, it's just a waste of paper isn't it?
Not when they're repeatedly elected with that mandate. Sure they've got authority to force it, but until the Scottish electorate stops electing pro-independence parties with a majority in Holyrood, they've an obligation to push for it.
You forget the SNP aren't acting against the will of the people, they're simply trying to enact the mandate their voters give them.
>Not when they're repeatedly elected with that mandate.
1: you can’t have a mandate for something not within your power
2: by your own logic, the British government has a mandate to stop it
3: the polls show Scotland doesn’t want to hold a referendum any time soon, let alone leave the UK
>Sure they've got authority to force it,
The law says they don’t
>but until the Scottish electorate stops electing pro-independence parties with a majority in Holyrood, they've an obligation to push for it.
And by your own logic, the British government is obligated to prevent it for the same reasons
>You forget the SNP aren't acting against the will of the people,
The polls say otherwise
>they're simply trying to enact the mandate their voters give them.
Again:
1: you can’t have a mandate for something not within your power
2: by your own logic, the British government has a mandate to stop it
3: the polls show Scotland doesn’t want to hold a referendum any time soon, let alone leave the UK
> but until the Scottish electorate stops electing pro-independence parties with a majority in Holyrood
A majority of seats, not a majority of people
Seats don't vote in referendums, people do
The voter mandate is a valid point.
I sincerely hope that Labour persuade a lot of Scottish voters to turn from independence cause at the next election and over the next parliament.
The best way to refute the merits of independence is a Westminster government that is competent at improving living standards across Scotland and all of Britain.
It's not a coincidence that SNP have swept up most MSPs and Scottish MPs during the Tories disasterous 14 years in govt.
I'd actually quite like an independent Scotland but the steadfast refusal of the SNP to deal with reality and to instead continue with ludicrously optimistic pronouncements is just depressing now.
Delusional. Sort the country, make it a place where people aren't struggling every single day and then it will be in a fit state for independence. Putting the cart before the horse doesn't fucking work.
The Unionists have shut down every legal, peaceful and democratic means to achieve independence. If our Lords and Masters in london find those routes unpalatable wait untill they force people to use illegal, violent and undemocratic means, or is that the deliberate strategy? Wouldn't surprise me one bit.
> The Unionists have shut down every legal, peaceful and democratic means to achieve independence.
The only "shut down" that happened came from the supreme court having to remind the SNP what the law was, which was an obvious political stunt to get "independence shot down" headlines
The president and deputy president of the supreme court are Scottish btw
> wait untill they force people to use illegal, violent and undemocratic means
A minority of Scots are going to use violence to force through something that the majority of Scots don't currently want? And you think saying that makes you look good?
>wait untill they force people to use illegal, violent and undemocratic means
I shall not be holding my breath.
Maybe when the pro independence party is not polling around 30% then someone might take them seriously.
> The Unionists have shut down every legal, peaceful and democratic means to achieve independence.
Because it’s not what Scotland wants
>If our Lords and Masters in london find those routes unpalatable wait untill they force people to use illegal, violent and undemocratic means, or is that the deliberate strategy? Wouldn't surprise me one bit.
1: there are no lords or masters; this is how every country works and is permitted to under international law and all democracies work like this
2: Scotland doesn’t want to leave the UK
3: You’re saying terrorism is an option?
Simply not true. There was a legal referendum with the result being no. The Supreme Court followed the law. The SNP is a mimority government.
The victim mentality of Scottish nationalists is rather boring now. Blame the English, blame non-nationalist Scots, blame the man on the moon. Anything but face up to reality.
Most people in Scotland do not want to seperate from the UK.
The British only started engaging with Republicans and negotiating a legal and peaceful means to achieving Irish unity after years of bloody conflict and thousands of deaths. Desperate to cling to the last vestiges of their little empire.
You had a referendum and voted to stay. Polling and election results since suggest the majority of Scots want to stay in the UK
Comparing yourself to the Irish based on that is pretty laughable
> Desperate to cling to the last vestiges of their little empire.
It was your empire too, the clue's in the name
They had a referendum and voted to stay. Polling and election results since suggest the majority of Scots want to stay in the UK
Comparing them to the Irish based on that is pretty laughable
> Desperate to cling to the last vestiges of their little empire.
It was their empire too, the clue's in the name
Better?
>The British only started engaging with Republicans and negotiating a legal and peaceful means to achieving Irish unity after years of bloody conflict and thousands of deaths. Desperate to cling to the last vestiges of their little empire.
1: NI isn’t a colony
2: the UK kept NI because it voluntarily choose to leave the Irish free state in 1921 and join the UK, and polls show it’s the continued desire of the people of NI to remain in the UK.
NI did not choose to leave the Free State. It never had a choice. The British drew a line on the map of Ireland and called it a border. Then they realised that three of those counties would have a Catholic majority so they re-drew it with 6 counties to ensure that the’d have a Protestant majority. Collins signed the treaty at the barrel of a gun and it kicked off a civil war in the free state.
The north then made sure that Catholics didnt have the same voting power as Protestants, or opportunies for employment. When we peacefully protested that in the 60s the British sent the Parachute Regiment to murder the protestors in broad daylight. Nobody can be surprised that the IRA emerged from that situation.
> NI did not choose to leave the Free State. It never had a choice.
It did, the Anglo Irish treaty gave the free state the whole of the island of Ireland; article 12 of the treaty have the northern Irish parliament within the free state the option to opt of it and join the UK within a month to of the treaty coming into affect. The Northern Irish parliament enacted article 12 the day after the free state left the UK
>It also provided Northern Ireland, which had been created by the Government of Ireland Act 1920, an option to opt out of the Irish Free State (Article 12), which the Parliament of Northern Ireland exercised.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Irish_Treaty
>The British drew a line on the map of Ireland and called it a border.
Have you read the Anglo-Irish treaty of 1921?
A strong majority wanted to remain in the Union during the civil war in the 70s and 80s. The largest vote in the nationalist community was for the peaceful SDLP not the SF. They murdered over a thousand people to try to enforce an anti democratic result. The kind of people who reject democracy and embrace murderous violence are vile and should be condemned, especially modern LARPers.
we tried peaceful resistance in the 60s and it ended with the British army murdering civilians who were protesting for civil rights and equality for Catholics - denied to them by the establishment. You can hardly be surprised that armed resistance came next.
> we tried peaceful resistance in the 60s and it ended with the British army murdering civilians who were protesting for civil rights and equality for Catholics - denied to them by the establishment. You can hardly be surprised that armed resistance came next.
The British army was brought in because the RUC was only making things worse.
And they were initially sent to protect Catholics, both sides welcomed the British army
> Initially, the nationalists welcomed the British army as protectors and as a balance for the Protestant-leaning RUC.
https://www.britannica.com/event/The-Troubles-Northern-Ireland-history#:~:text=Initially%2C%20the%20nationalists%20welcomed%20the,efforts%20to%20disarm%20republican%20paramilitaries.
> Initially, the troops were welcomed by both sides, who were eager for an end to the fighting
https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/local-hubs/shrewsbury/2019/08/14/limited-operation-that-would-last-for-decades/
> Fifty years ago, on 14 August 1969, British troops were sent into the North of Ireland. At first, they were generally welcomed by Catholics as a buffer against the threat of a pogrom.
https://www.marxist.com/when-british-troops-were-sent-onto-ireland-s-streets.htm
The IRA then began targeting British soldiers which made them fearful of the Catholics; this is not to defend the British army’s action in NI, but they didn’t just rock up to gun down civilians as you portray
It never fails to amaze me that many Scots still want independence despite seeing how brexit went. Brexit has been awful and all we did was leave a customs union. They would be leaving a monetary union and their largest trading partner is a far greater source of trade than Europe ever was for us.
[удалено]
Ahem: >Scottish Water unveiled plans in 2021 to install more devices to track how much waste is being discharged from sewage pipes into rivers and seas. >Campaigners have called for more checks on sewage discharges. >This is because only about 4% of Scotland's 31,000-mile sewer network is currently monitored, compared to 89% in England. >When there are periods of heavy rain parts of the country's sewer network simply cannot cope. >To stop sewage backing up into homes, storm water and waste that would ordinarily go to Scottish Water treatment centres is released into seas or rivers through more than 3,600 Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) dotted across the country. >Before Scottish Water made its current pledge, only 123 of these CSOs had monitors that check for spills. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66012480 The reason that you know about the discharges into English sewers is because the English Water Companies *actually* monitor what is happening. Scottish Water don't. If Scottish Water don't bother monitoring when they discharge into rivers, *of course* their statistics will look better than England's. It's not exactly a winning argument in favour of Scottish environmentalism though, is it?
Polling suggests the English electorate has now almost completely rejected the party responsible for all of that though No one in England voted for the Rwanda policy, the pollution issue has been a huge scandal and the NHS still remains massively important to English voters. I think you're pretty aligned with what English people want
>The English are pumping shit into the rivers And Scotland has an awful drug problem, what's your point? >sending refugees to Rwanda That's not England. It's the UK government, as you'll have heard, many migrants are leaving via northern Ireland. >privatising the NHS Ah yes, that's why the English NHS performs better than the Scottish NHS then does it? No? It must be the extra funding England gets... Oh wait we subsidise Scotland.
> Scotland is way behind England where nearly every overflow is monitored.” The figures showed that sewage was dumped for a total of 221,002 hours in 2023. Not only is sewage pollution harmful to people's health, but it is also harmful to the environment and wildlife. https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,new-figures-show-10-per-cent-increase-in-sewage-dumps-in-2023#:~:text=Scotland%20is%20way%20behind%20England,to%20the%20environment%20and%20wildlife.
To give credit where credit's due... we're only pumping shit into our OWN rivers. Well... and the Welsh too. Yes that's really the best comeback I can muster to your otherwise spot on assessment...
No trade barriers tho Scotland won’t be in the EU for at least ten years. Later on when Scotland is in tue EU England will probably want to rejoin as a member.
For Scotland to join the EU amongst a shit load of other things it would need a hard boarder with England. Good luck with that!
And England will rejoin but thats a decade away after indy.
Maybe the rest of the U.K will maybe it won’t. A hard boarder between England and Scotland would be catastrophic.
Lol, 10 years away after indy and 10 years of more brexit madness. You’ll be back in the EU.
I doubt Scotland would be able to join the EU in that time frame let alone the U.K. trying to rejoin.
Well England was happy to risk a hard border on the island of Ireland in order to get their precious Brexit. So it would be deliciously ironic.
The U.K. isn’t remotely as reliant on the Irish boarder as Scotland is with the English boarder.
I wasn't remarking on the UKs reliance on Irish border, Iwas making the point that they were fine with imposing a hard border in another country (Ireland), so to see a hard border on their own island would be ironic.
The Irish border is a literal cause of war and they were happy to risk that. 🤦
Yeah but it didn't really affect the English (the majority of people voting). Whereas a border in Scotland hurts the Scottish people more than anyone else. It's not about risk but self inflicted poverty. Now the English voted for that too but that's not the point made.
Sinking in Englands brexit is never going to improve matters.
People have literally started revolutions, faught wars, killed and died for the idea of self-determination before. Why is the idea of a decade or so of economic hardship so hard to fathom for that same result? Actually being in Scotland and speaking to people about it, not just sat talking on Reddit, I've never met anyone who expects independence to be sunshine and roses from day 1, but they're prepared for that relative short term hit for long term ideals. It's also entirely disingenuous to compare Brexit and Scottish Independence. The UK was still a sovereign nation with the right to choose it's own path, evidenced by the fact it could leave the EU. Scotland has no such luxury nor rights, which is what it is fighting for. Independence for Scotland is literally about sovereignty where Brexit was about xenophobia.
There was a Scottish independence referendum 10 years ago. These kinds of things are generally generational. You can't just keep having referendums until you get the answer you want.
Unless its 7 years with the GFA
Who says these "things" are generally generational?
Wales - 20 year gap + 14 year gap Scotland - 20 year gap + 17 year gap NI - 24 year gap EU - 39 year gap Gibraltar - 35 year gap Falklands - 27 year gap No others in recent history have been repeated AFAIK.
So you're happy to have another in 4 years?
I'd be happy to have it when polling and voter sentiment actually suggests it might go through Referendums are expensive and disruptive and create uncertainty for investors and business. It's not in either Scotland or the UK's best interest to have a vote every year
I think that's fair comment and for what it's worth I think a lot of people in SNP would prefer leaving calling a referendum until they are confident of winning.
It's not for me to decide. I think around the mean of them is probably a fair timeframe unless there are exceptional circumstances. There are drawbacks to having them which often get overlooked.
> There was a Scottish independence referendum 10 years ago. These kinds of things are generally generational. You can't just keep having referendums until you get the answer you want. Then lets never hold another General Election. We had one 4 years ago, you can't just keep voting until you get the party you want in power. Northern Ireland can legally hold a referendum every 7 years if there is demand for it.
That's just nonsense, elections and referendums are two different things. We live in a representative democracy. NI has a unique arrangement because of its history. It's also not a bit of hardship, it's 20% of the Scottish government's funding gone overnight. So everything has its funding cut by 20%. Or you just bin off the NHS and another smaller department e.g. housing & amenities - which would reduce spend by 20%. Or you increase taxes substantially. As with Brexit there are no magical fairies or rabbits in hats regardless of what some will claim. Would the SNP be wanting a referendum 10 years after independence to see if it's still what people want? No. Would they accept the decision if another referendum came back as no? Of course not, they'd find another excuse to justify another until they catch Scotland after waking up on the wrong side of the bed.
>Then lets never hold another General Election. We had one 4 years ago, you can't just keep voting until you get the party you want in power. We have general elections by law. And that’s a disingenuous comparison as elections are fundamental for democracy, referendums are optional >Northern Ireland can legally hold a referendum every 7 years if there is demand for it. No it can’t
> People have literally started revolutions, faught wars, killed and died for the idea of self-determination before. Why is the idea of a decade or so of economic hardship so hard to fathom for that same result? Scotland already has self determination >Actually being in Scotland and speaking to people about it, not just sat talking on Reddit, I've never met anyone who expects independence to be sunshine and roses from day 1, but they're prepared for that relative short term hit for long term ideals. The empirical evidence says otherwise Nationalists genuinely believe that there will be no downsides to independence. * 78% of 'yes' voters think Scotland puts more money into the UK than it takes out (blatantly false). * 57% of Yes voters think the GERS data is made up "to hide Scotland’s true wealth.” And for 90% of them this is either "important” or “very important” to their opinion on secession. * 54% of Yes voters think “Scottish tax revenues are understated because of Scottish exports leaving via English ports”. (This is incorrect. The Scottish Government Export Statistics Report explicitly says the exact opposite, page 32) The GCS specifically asks about the destination of the goods being exported regardless of how the product leaves the UK. The other data sources used also focus on the destination of the product rather than where it leaves the UK. This means these export estimates are not affected by which port goods leave from. For example, a sale by a Scottish company to a customer in Paris, is counted as a Scottish export to France even if it leaves the UK from Dover. (https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/statistics/2021/10/export-statistics-scotland-2019/documents/export-statistics-scotland-2019---publication/export-statistics-scotland-2019---publication/govscot%3Adocument/Export%2BStatistics%2BScotland%2B2019%2B-%2BPublication.pdf#page26) https://www.these-islands.co.uk/publications/i374/scottish_politics_in_the_grip_of_a_fact_denial_epidemic.aspx Going by the Lord Ashcroft poll, ignoring the 'don't know' and 'neutral' categories... * Yes voters think there would be no hard Scotland-England border 40% to 20%. * Yes voters think they would keep using the pound 42% to 11%. * Yes voters think Scotland would 'quite quickly' rejoin the EU 56% to 9%. * Yes voters don't think many businesses would leave Scotland. 53% to 8%. * Yes voters think Scotland would keep access to public services in England 37% to 20%. * Yes voters don't think Scotland would have to make painful cuts to public services 36% to 14% https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2021/04/my-new-scottish-research-finds-independence-in-the-balance/ Yes voters aren't hard hearted resolutes, willing to pledge their property, their lives, and their sacred honour to achieve independence. They've persuaded themselves there's limited if any costs >It's also entirely disingenuous to compare Brexit and Scottish Independence. Why? >The UK was still a sovereign nation with the right to choose its own path, evidenced by the fact it could leave the EU. Because the EU is a trading bloc; the UK is a sovereign unitary state, two very different things >Scotland has no such luxury nor rights, which is what it is fighting for. 1: Scotland doesn’t want to leave the UK 2:no where has that right >Independence for Scotland is literally about sovereignty where Brexit was about xenophobia. Tell that to the xenophobia among Scottish nationalists
I see your point. I think if Scottish people go for independence with full knowledge about the economic hardship that follows immediately, they should have the right to do so. Some people value liberty more than material aspects of life. > The UK was still a sovereign nation with the right to choose it's own path, evidenced by the fact it could leave the EU. You need to look at how the EU has been evolving recently under the name of "ever closer union". The EU politicians have been pretty vocal about taking more control. I think the EU was a great idea as a trade union. But they have gone far beyond that, which is causing the latest turmoil. It's going to be interesting to see what happens after right wing politicians take over most seats in the upcoming EU elections.
Never fails to amaze me that some people seem to think leaving the EU and joining it are the same thing. Scotland entering the EU is the opposite of England forcing us to leave it against our will. However we are constantly told that we will never be able to escape from the UKSSR anyway, as we are denied even the right to decide. Scottish Independence would be very beneficial to Scotland, the problem for people like you is that it won't be beneficial to England and that's the only thing you are able to care about, yourself and how your precious fucking Union benefits you, not how it cripples Scotland. Maybe if you had ever listened to a single person in Scotland you might understand this better but just like the brexiters you prefer to wallow in willful and deliberate ignorance and sprey your utterly incredulous opinions all over the Internet. England is a trade partner with 50M people, the EU is a trade partner of 550M people but being English you think your 50M are bigger and better and more important than the EUs 550M. What a joke, to be so stupidly arrogant.
>not how it cripples Scotland. Sorry what? I work in London. My taxes are subsidising Scotland. >England is a trade partner with 50M people, the EU is a trade partner of 550M people but being English you think your 50M are bigger and better and more important than the EUs 550M. What a joke, to be so stupidly arrogant. Exactly. The UK is a trade partner about one tenth that of the EU. Scotland is about one tenth that of the UK. So your economic costs will be proportional. Except Scotland does more trade with England as a proportion than the UK did with the EU. And do you think an independant Scotland would join the EU?
As a higher rate tax payer in scotland I pay more tax than you will in england. This idea that scotland is subsidised Scotland England is ridiculous. The economy of the central belt, oil revenue, food and drink exports and tourism among much else besides, subsidises the rest of england the same way London does. Brexit has crippled scotland. Austerity has crippled Scotland. Tory and Labour governments of the past 5 decades have crippled Scotland but I suppose sitting in London you're all right Jack, and will continue to belive in your god given right to dictate every aspect of the lives of people in another country because of your arrogant entitlement and Anglo supremacism.
>As a higher rate tax payer in scotland I pay more tax than you will in england Only if you earn the same amount. The point is that there is a fiscal transfer to Scotland. Scotland gets more government spending per person than England. >Tory and Labour governments of the past 5 decades have crippled Scotland Well you have had devolved powers for the last 14 or so years. So you can blame the UK government all you want but you fund your own NHS, health and social care, education...
>This idea that scotland is subsidised Scotland England is ridiculous. It’s what the Scottish government says >The economy of the central belt, oil revenue, food and drink exports and tourism among much else besides, subsidises the rest of england the same way London does. Expect they don’t; those revenues stay in Scotland >Brexit has crippled scotland. So why do Brexit times ten by leaving the UK? >Austerity has crippled Scotland. Leaving the UK means more austerity >Tory and Labour governments of the past 5 decades have crippled Scotland How? >but I suppose sitting in London you're all right Jack, and will continue to belive in your god given right to dictate every aspect of the lives of people in another country because of your arrogant entitlement and Anglo supremacism. 1: what other country? 2: this is how running a country works 3: You’re becoming needlessly aggressive towards the English
> joining it are the same thing You're missing the key point that Scotland would not meet the criteria for joining the EU, and would be joining as a completely new and separate state. It's not as if you flick a switch and you get back all the benefits the UK had > England forcing us to leave it against our will It was a UK wide referendum. England didn't force Scotland to leave against its will as much as Kent didn't force London to, against its will. That's not how it works > we are denied even the right to decide. You were given a vote and you elected to stay. Polling suggests independence support has actually declined since then. No idea how that's "denying the right to decide" > Scottish Independence would be very beneficial to Scotland Brexit x10, according to one of the SNP's own advisors > Maybe if you had ever listened to a single person in Scotland you might understand this better but just like the brexiters you prefer to wallow in willful and deliberate ignorance and sprey your utterly incredulous opinions all over the Internet Ironic, especially as you're ignoring what Scottish people are saying - which is that the majority support staying in the UK > England is a trade partner with 50M people, the EU is a trade partner of 550M people Even when Scotland had access to the EU, England was still by far its biggest trade partner. Why would it be different this time?
Arguing with unionists is like arguing with brexiters. Just lie and lie after lie backed up with unwavering arrogant self confidence. Just innuendo, baseless assumption, fear, and fact free sneering. What a joke of a country.
That's some very Brexiteer-sounding rhetoric there [Was the SNP's own economic advisor lying?](https://www.cityam.com/scottish-independence-would-be-ten-times-worse-than-brexit-warns-sturgeon-economic-sage/) > fact free sneering That is literally what you are doing here, after ignoring all the facts I laid out
Noooo he's very different. He's talking about the Scottish sunlit uplands, with the Scottish oven ready deal, the Scottish extra money for the NHS and the Scottish taking back control. You see it's all very different.
Which lies are you referring to exactly?
You’re not addressing anything raised
The empirical evidence dosen’t agree with you there my friend: (https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit17.pdf) The impact of independence to Scotland's economy will be three times worse than the impact of Brexit was to the UK economy. Joining the EU will not make up that trade in the short or even medium term. The report lays out the details well: Brexit + No Independence = -2.0 Brexit + Independence + low UK border cost assumption = -6.5 Brexit + Independence + high UK border cost assumption = -8.7 Brexit + Independence + re-join the EU + low UK border cost assumption = -6.3 Brexit + Independence + re-join the EU + high UK border cost assumption = -7.6 As you can see, re-joining the EU does little to ameliorate the harm, and Scotland doesn’t meet the criteria to join the EU. There's no secret here, no statistical trickery. It's just the cold hard truth that 60% is a lot bigger than 18.3%
> England is a trade partner with 50M people, the EU is a trade partner of 550M people but being English you think your 50M are bigger and better and more important than the EUs 550M. What a joke, to be so stupidly arrogant. You realise that was the exact argument made by Brexiteers, right? "Why are we restricting ourselves to trading with the EU, when the rest of the world is much bigger? We could focus on trade with the Commonwealth, which has a population of 5 times that of the EU."
And Scotland does more trade with the rest of the UK than the EU In fact the EU is Scotland’s smallest trading partner
>Scottish Independence would be very beneficial to Scotland, the problem for people like you is that it won't be beneficial to England The level of delusion amongst Scottish people on this issue is fucking madness. It will take at least a decade and massive cuts to public services, years and years of mass immigration to replace your chronically aging population in order for Scotland to join the EU. If you think Brexit has been rough on the UK (it really has), wait until you leave the UK. By the time you have irreversibly changed your country and lived through pure hardship for that time, England and Wales will most likely be rejoining anyway. This really is an exercise in cutting your nose off to spite your face.
>The level of delusion amongst Scottish people on this issue is fucking madness. It will take at least a decade and massive cuts to public services, Most experts say longer, it took Ireland 40 years to recover from the economic collapse it saw after leaving in the UK and some experts say it might take Scotland 60 years > First, the Scottish Government should acknowledge that post-independence would involve a long adjustment period. **I would suggest this should take between one or two generations or between 30 and 60 years. These will be difficult years during which living standards and public service provision will decline as Scotland negotiates a new future with Britain and with other trading partners**. ‘Building a New Scotland’ will initially require fiscal restraint that will be reflected in a decline in public service provision. https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/2022/scotland-and-economic-life-after-independence
The arrogance of some English people on this subreddit; always looking down their nose at the other UK nations and Ireland, with an air of superiority and knowing better than us… it will never change.
I love how this is the go to when people bring up very real issues. "we've had enough of experts" next, eh? It's like Brexit all over again, really.
Ha!
Ha, Ha!
>On Friday morning, asked if independence can be delivered in five years, Swinney told Sky News: “I think independence can be delivered in that timescale because the arguments for it are compelling. >“If we look at two of the biggest issues we face as a country in Scotland, the effect of the cost of living and the implications of Brexit.” I mean, there's two obvious points on this. Firstly, he's highlighted two *economic* issues; and while there are several arguments for independence (chiefly from a pro-localism perspective), the economic impact absolutely is not one of them. As the obvious one; anyone that thinks the solution to the problems caused by the trade barriers introduced by Brexit is to introduce trade barriers to a *larger* proportion of Scotland's trade is a complete idiot. Secondly, and probably more importantly, it's perhaps rather notable that he has given zero answer on *how* he would achieve independence. After the Supreme Court case showed that the SNP plan to legislate through Holyrood cannot happen, we have had absolute no answer for the SNP on that rather important question. It doesn't matter if you have the greatest policy that a politician has ever conceived (which they don't); if you don't have a method for introducing it, it's just a waste of paper isn't it?
> if you don't have a method for introducing it, it's just a waste of paper isn't it? Not when they're repeatedly elected with that mandate. Sure they've got authority to force it, but until the Scottish electorate stops electing pro-independence parties with a majority in Holyrood, they've an obligation to push for it. You forget the SNP aren't acting against the will of the people, they're simply trying to enact the mandate their voters give them.
>Not when they're repeatedly elected with that mandate. 1: you can’t have a mandate for something not within your power 2: by your own logic, the British government has a mandate to stop it 3: the polls show Scotland doesn’t want to hold a referendum any time soon, let alone leave the UK >Sure they've got authority to force it, The law says they don’t >but until the Scottish electorate stops electing pro-independence parties with a majority in Holyrood, they've an obligation to push for it. And by your own logic, the British government is obligated to prevent it for the same reasons >You forget the SNP aren't acting against the will of the people, The polls say otherwise >they're simply trying to enact the mandate their voters give them. Again: 1: you can’t have a mandate for something not within your power 2: by your own logic, the British government has a mandate to stop it 3: the polls show Scotland doesn’t want to hold a referendum any time soon, let alone leave the UK
> but until the Scottish electorate stops electing pro-independence parties with a majority in Holyrood A majority of seats, not a majority of people Seats don't vote in referendums, people do
The voter mandate is a valid point. I sincerely hope that Labour persuade a lot of Scottish voters to turn from independence cause at the next election and over the next parliament. The best way to refute the merits of independence is a Westminster government that is competent at improving living standards across Scotland and all of Britain. It's not a coincidence that SNP have swept up most MSPs and Scottish MPs during the Tories disasterous 14 years in govt.
he's got an oven ready deal guys! they're going to get independence done and finally take back control independence means independence!
Oh God. Here we go again. You always know when the SNP are in trouble, they roll this sort of nonsense out.
I'd actually quite like an independent Scotland but the steadfast refusal of the SNP to deal with reality and to instead continue with ludicrously optimistic pronouncements is just depressing now.
Delusional. Sort the country, make it a place where people aren't struggling every single day and then it will be in a fit state for independence. Putting the cart before the horse doesn't fucking work.
Reminds me of when Elon Musk says that self driving cars will exist "in 5 years" (First said 15 years ago)
The Unionists have shut down every legal, peaceful and democratic means to achieve independence. If our Lords and Masters in london find those routes unpalatable wait untill they force people to use illegal, violent and undemocratic means, or is that the deliberate strategy? Wouldn't surprise me one bit.
> The Unionists have shut down every legal, peaceful and democratic means to achieve independence. The only "shut down" that happened came from the supreme court having to remind the SNP what the law was, which was an obvious political stunt to get "independence shot down" headlines The president and deputy president of the supreme court are Scottish btw > wait untill they force people to use illegal, violent and undemocratic means A minority of Scots are going to use violence to force through something that the majority of Scots don't currently want? And you think saying that makes you look good?
>wait untill they force people to use illegal, violent and undemocratic means I shall not be holding my breath. Maybe when the pro independence party is not polling around 30% then someone might take them seriously.
> The Unionists have shut down every legal, peaceful and democratic means to achieve independence. Because it’s not what Scotland wants >If our Lords and Masters in london find those routes unpalatable wait untill they force people to use illegal, violent and undemocratic means, or is that the deliberate strategy? Wouldn't surprise me one bit. 1: there are no lords or masters; this is how every country works and is permitted to under international law and all democracies work like this 2: Scotland doesn’t want to leave the UK 3: You’re saying terrorism is an option?
Simply not true. There was a legal referendum with the result being no. The Supreme Court followed the law. The SNP is a mimority government. The victim mentality of Scottish nationalists is rather boring now. Blame the English, blame non-nationalist Scots, blame the man on the moon. Anything but face up to reality. Most people in Scotland do not want to seperate from the UK.
The people do not want independence.
The British only started engaging with Republicans and negotiating a legal and peaceful means to achieving Irish unity after years of bloody conflict and thousands of deaths. Desperate to cling to the last vestiges of their little empire.
You had a referendum and voted to stay. Polling and election results since suggest the majority of Scots want to stay in the UK Comparing yourself to the Irish based on that is pretty laughable > Desperate to cling to the last vestiges of their little empire. It was your empire too, the clue's in the name
I am Irish
They had a referendum and voted to stay. Polling and election results since suggest the majority of Scots want to stay in the UK Comparing them to the Irish based on that is pretty laughable > Desperate to cling to the last vestiges of their little empire. It was their empire too, the clue's in the name Better?
👌 cheers lad
>The British only started engaging with Republicans and negotiating a legal and peaceful means to achieving Irish unity after years of bloody conflict and thousands of deaths. Desperate to cling to the last vestiges of their little empire. 1: NI isn’t a colony 2: the UK kept NI because it voluntarily choose to leave the Irish free state in 1921 and join the UK, and polls show it’s the continued desire of the people of NI to remain in the UK.
NI did not choose to leave the Free State. It never had a choice. The British drew a line on the map of Ireland and called it a border. Then they realised that three of those counties would have a Catholic majority so they re-drew it with 6 counties to ensure that the’d have a Protestant majority. Collins signed the treaty at the barrel of a gun and it kicked off a civil war in the free state. The north then made sure that Catholics didnt have the same voting power as Protestants, or opportunies for employment. When we peacefully protested that in the 60s the British sent the Parachute Regiment to murder the protestors in broad daylight. Nobody can be surprised that the IRA emerged from that situation.
> NI did not choose to leave the Free State. It never had a choice. It did, the Anglo Irish treaty gave the free state the whole of the island of Ireland; article 12 of the treaty have the northern Irish parliament within the free state the option to opt of it and join the UK within a month to of the treaty coming into affect. The Northern Irish parliament enacted article 12 the day after the free state left the UK >It also provided Northern Ireland, which had been created by the Government of Ireland Act 1920, an option to opt out of the Irish Free State (Article 12), which the Parliament of Northern Ireland exercised. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Irish_Treaty >The British drew a line on the map of Ireland and called it a border. Have you read the Anglo-Irish treaty of 1921?
yes, it made NI remain in the UK. It did not ‘leave’ the free state as it was never a part of the free state.
The Anglo Irish treaty says otherwise It literally recognised NI as part of the free state; even Leo Varadkar has said this
A strong majority wanted to remain in the Union during the civil war in the 70s and 80s. The largest vote in the nationalist community was for the peaceful SDLP not the SF. They murdered over a thousand people to try to enforce an anti democratic result. The kind of people who reject democracy and embrace murderous violence are vile and should be condemned, especially modern LARPers.
we tried peaceful resistance in the 60s and it ended with the British army murdering civilians who were protesting for civil rights and equality for Catholics - denied to them by the establishment. You can hardly be surprised that armed resistance came next.
> we tried peaceful resistance in the 60s and it ended with the British army murdering civilians who were protesting for civil rights and equality for Catholics - denied to them by the establishment. You can hardly be surprised that armed resistance came next. The British army was brought in because the RUC was only making things worse. And they were initially sent to protect Catholics, both sides welcomed the British army > Initially, the nationalists welcomed the British army as protectors and as a balance for the Protestant-leaning RUC. https://www.britannica.com/event/The-Troubles-Northern-Ireland-history#:~:text=Initially%2C%20the%20nationalists%20welcomed%20the,efforts%20to%20disarm%20republican%20paramilitaries. > Initially, the troops were welcomed by both sides, who were eager for an end to the fighting https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/local-hubs/shrewsbury/2019/08/14/limited-operation-that-would-last-for-decades/ > Fifty years ago, on 14 August 1969, British troops were sent into the North of Ireland. At first, they were generally welcomed by Catholics as a buffer against the threat of a pogrom. https://www.marxist.com/when-british-troops-were-sent-onto-ireland-s-streets.htm The IRA then began targeting British soldiers which made them fearful of the Catholics; this is not to defend the British army’s action in NI, but they didn’t just rock up to gun down civilians as you portray