• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

How do you "break off" a military for an independent Scotland?

Rookie Green said:
Has any sort of separation on this scale happened before?

It's always been one of the thoughts in my head whenever I hear of Quebec wanting to separate from Canada- I've never been able to see how Quebec would develop its own military.


Well, it wasn't on such a small scale as Scotland would be, but there used to be a "Soviet Union" with the Red Army.  If you want a British Empire Commonwealth model there is the partition of India (now India and Pakistan) that not only included those two countries in the military forces split but also sent some elements (Gurkhas) to the British Army.

And for a reverse example there is the reunification of Germany.
 
The real joke will be on Scotland if they try to run their own country.

Because Great Britain (and the Empire) has been run from London since about the time of the War of the Roses, centralization has meant that Scotland has less power (and the infrastrucuture/political systems/experience required to effectively wield it) that any Canadian province.

They're pretty much doomed to failure. But maybe that's what London wants so they can waltz into the rubble stewn landscape after the wheels come off and say 'I told you so'. 
 
Aye lads....here's oor secret weapun!

Rrrrr ye listenin McGregor?

They canna resist!!!
 
Which way dae Ah rin fur yin o those?  :o :blotto:
 
daftandbarmy said:
Brilliant! Enough of this 'passive' cam pattern stuff. What we need is an 'offensive' minded cam - paign. And this one, once glimpsed by the enemy, is sure to induce instant elipeptic fits.... ;D

It's certainly "offensive" to my eyes, which are burning now thank you very much... >:(
 
First battalion, McHairy Highlanders present and correct, sir.

1zfo1ls.jpg
 
A seperate Scotland would still be part of the UK correct ? They could just let the English foot the defense bill. :camo:
 
The MOD will gleefully cut the Highland units from the rolls about 5 minutes after a successful vote by the Scottish Paraliment.
 
Scotland would be able to be an independent country and not fail? I dont get how it wouldnt.  Same for Quebec, as history shows countries can rise out of nothing. If South Sudan can survive, any country has a chance.
 
hagan_91 said:
Scotland would be able to be an independent country and not fail? I dont get how it wouldnt.  Same for Quebec, as history shows countries can rise out of nothing. If South Sudan can survive, any country has a chance.

You're comparing apples and bowling balls in your semi necropost.

The situation in Scotland differs from the one in Quebec which differs from any others.

Read more.
 
What has the British done for us?  :piper:

Roads, medicines, and foods that don't consist of blood or oats....


Scotland should take a long hard look at Ireland.
 
And made a lot of Scots extremely rich in the process .....

Rich enough to move away and run countries like England, India and Canada, or set up trading/raiding enterprises in out of the way places like Hong Kong.

Although I do like a nice bit of fried black pudding with my fried gammon, fried bread, fried tomato, baked beans and brown sauce (breakfast of caber tossers the world over).

By the way Hagan, did you know that Montcalm (with his Scots aide-de-camp Jimmy Johnstone of Moffatt) and Wolfe (under the command of Jean Louis Ligonier de Castres, General Officer Commanding all British Forces Everywhere) were squabbling over a field granted by Champlain to his buddy the Scot Abraham Martin.

See how well everything turns out?  Cheers.
 
Hardly surprising results.  Can't wait to read of the back peddling to come.

Troops will march south to England if independence goes ahead because being in Scottish army will be too BORING

    Damning report reveals reluctance of soldiers to join Alex Salmond's army
    Officers dismiss Scottish Defence Force as 'too dead-end and parochial'
    Troops would rather stay in British forces so they can see action

By Alan Roden

PUBLISHED: 07:42 GMT, 2 July 2013 | UPDATED: 08:36 GMT, 2 July 2013

Scottish soldiers will desert Alex Salmond’s independent army to fight alongside their British comrades if the SNP wins next year’s referendum.

A devastating new study which quizzed servicemen has left the Nationalists’ defence blueprint in tatters, concluding that Mr Salmond’s proposals ‘do not withstand serious scrutiny’.

For the first time, serving soldiers were asked for their views and ‘a majority – perhaps even a large majority’ would prefer to remain with the British Armed Forces’ because they will see action instead of spending their time in Scotland 'thumb twiddling’.

In one platoon, 30 of the 32 men who returned from Afghanistan earlier this year said they would not join a Scottish defence force (SDF).

One soldier was undecided and another admitted he would join the SDF for an easier life, adding: ‘All we’d be doing is checking passports on the M6.’

One officer questioned why a young Scottish man would sign up to ‘sit on the border in Cyprus or Lebanon with a blue beret and no rounds in his rifle’ when he could instead train at Sandhurst and join an elite fighting force.

The findings have raised fears of a ‘two-tier’ military structure in Scotland, with the brightest and best youngsters choosing to defend Britain before transferring to the SDF once they are married, have children and want to ‘calm down a bit later in life’.

Scotland would also need its own special forces to protect the North Sea oil rigs, but there would be a major recruitment crisis because the job would involve ‘thumb twiddling’.

Other findings in the 128-page report from the highly respected Henry Jackson Society include:

    The SNP’s defence strategy is not geared towards defending Scotland, but is designed ‘to help it win the independence referendum’.
    A separate Scotland would have an ‘Army-centric’ military, when a greater focus on maritime and air defence ‘would be preferable’.
    Defence firms that employ thousands of Scots could be forced to relocate to England to access the world’s second-largest defence market.
    Orders for the UK’s Type 26 global combat ship would ‘almost certainly’ be lost, and – in time – ‘most’ of Scotland’s shipyards would close.
    SNP plans to base Scotland’s navy on the Clyde raise ‘legitimate questions’, given that oil and gas rigs are located almost entirely in the north
    and east.

The report, launched in Edinburgh today, has been written by defence expert and author George Grant. He has previously provided briefings to the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst.

Latest figures show that Scotland’s notional share of the UK’s defence budget was nearly £3.3billion in 2011-12.

The SNP has drawn up plans to spend £2.5billion on a 15,000-strong Scottish military if there is a ‘yes’ vote in next year’s referendum, although it claims this is around £500million more than is currently spent within Scotland’s borders.

Mr Grant’s report concludes that ‘if one is being objective on this subject, it is almost impossible not to arrive at the conclusion that – as things currently stand – defence policy is one of the SNP’s weak points’.

‘This is not because they have attempted to put forward a fully thought-through defence strategy that nevertheless appears to have some deficiencies, but rather because their strategy appears to be predicated more on how not to alienate voters, than on how to actually defend Scotland.’

He adds: ‘It is the considered conclusion of this report that not only have the SNP failed to answer most questions adequately to date, but that any – if not the majority – of their proposals for defence do not withstand serious scrutiny.’
'It’s a no brainer. The Scottish Defence Force would be too dead-end and too parochial'
Army officer to report

The SNP wants to keep all of Scotland’s historic Army regiments, but that would require around 14,000 personnel – leaving just 1,000 for an air force and a navy.

And one of the major problems would be persuading Scots soldiers to desert the British Armed Forces.

One officer told the report’s author: ‘What of the young officer born, raised, and educated in Scotland? He can either join the Paras [British Army Parachute Regiment] or the local Scots regiment.

‘If he chooses the latter, he cannot go to Sandhurst; so he would be going to a new training school in Scotland, with the best hope of going and sitting on the border in Cyprus or Lebanon with a blue beret and no rounds in his rifle.

‘Or he can join the Paras, one of the most recognisable regiments in the world. What’s he going to do? It’s a no brainer; the SDF would be too dead-end and too parochial.’

The officer said the SDF would be staffed by ‘second-class Scots soldiers’.

Defence experts Professor Sir Hew Strachan told Mr Grant: ‘I can envisage a two-tier military service, where ambitious young Scots join the British Army, and then, once he’s married and got children and wants to calm down a bit later in life, he transfers to the Scottish Army.’

The report outlines potential massive job losses in the shipyards and at the Faslane naval base on the Clyde, where the UK’s Trident nuclear missile system is based. But it also warns of the impact on defence companies.

‘Privately, concerns have been raised about the potential loss of access to the world’s second-largest defence market, and there have been some discussions about the possibility of relocation south of the border in the event of a ‘Yes’ vote in 2014,’ it claims.
Criticism: Labour's shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said the SNP's plans are NP defence plans are 'quarter-baked'

Criticism: Labour's shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said the SNP's plans are NP defence plans are 'quarter-baked'

‘One well-placed source told this report that, following discussions he had had with the board of one of the big defence companies, ‘they said quite clearly that, if Scotland became independent, they would move their operation out from near Edinburgh’.

The company in question employs several thousand people in Scotland who, the source said, would consequently lose their jobs.’

Addressing military infrastructure, the study found that the Eurofighter Typhoon would likely be too ‘expensive and complex’ for a separate Scotland, while the ageing Tornado GR4 ‘lacks an air-to-air capability’ and the Hawk trainer is ‘comparatively slow, with no radar and only limited offensive capability’.

‘Therefore, it would be unable to fulfil the air-defence function envisaged by the party,’ the report states.

The study also suggests that purchasing four diesel-powered submarines would cost Scotland up to £2.6billion, which is described as ‘prohibitive’.

Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy said: ‘It’s official. The SNP defence plans are quarter-baked.

‘There’s a growing army of experts who have shown just how flawed their defence plans are. The defence and security of Scotland’s people and national interests must be the top priority, but all we get from the SNP is political posturing.’

But a spokesman for the Scottish Government said an independent Scotland would have ‘first-class conventional forces which will play a full role in defending the country and cooperating with international partners’.

‘Scotland stands to inherit a fair share of existing UK defence assets, and an annual defence and security budget of £2.5billion would represent an increase of more than £500million on recent UK levels of defence spending in Scotland,’ he said.

‘We have also been clear that we will retain all current defence bases, including Faslane - which will be Scotland’s main conventional naval facility – and our long-term commitment will ensure continued support for jobs and local economies in all the communities around Scotland that are home to military bases.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2353394/Scottish-referendum-Troops-march-south-England-independence-goes-ahead-Scottish-army-BORING.html#ixzz2XvyqntZm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
The SNP seems to have in their platform that the proposed independent Scotland is to be a member of NATO -- but the North Atlantic Treaty requires unanimous consent for new members, the UK would have a veto. Membership's not guaranteed.

In theory, there's no reason why 5 million Scots can't have a decent military; that's about the same size as Denmark, Finland, or Norway -- and it's a little bigger than New Zealand. Small countries (even smaller than Canada) can have serviceable little armies. But in practice, building a decent small military involves significant cost and needs manpower. New Zealand recruits a lot of overseas personnel, Denmark, Finland and Norway have conscription.

Instead, it looks like the SNP would prefer to copy the cost and capability of the Republic of Ireland's military -- but that would produce a token force, and one not likely to get approved for NATO membership.
 
Aww Hell, I'll go. As long as you can qualify with Scottish ancestry. :piper:
 
cupper said:
Aww Hell, I'll go. As long as you can qualify with Scottish ancestry. :piper:

Me too, my family spent a lot of time in Scotland between 1290 ish and 1746.  We were just tourists, though.
 
There's no need for you guys to clutch at family-history straws to join a Scottish army, if it's simply so you can dress like a Catholic school girl.

              :whistle:
 
Journeyman said:
There's no need for you guys to clutch at family-history straws to join a Scottish army, if it's simply so you can dress like a Catholic school girl.

              :whistle:

Where do you think the dress code for Catholic School Girls came from?....huh....huh....
 
Back
Top