Scottish independence, a lost cause?

[Takhisis]

It's really quite tragic if you look at the reasons for why we voted no - terrified pensioners and some sick sense of "loyalism" from morons in the Orange Order and Rangers fans.

Monarchical loyalism, what else?

Politicians in Madrid and Brussels also made it clear that an independent Scotland would not automatically join the EU.

'Not automatically' is not the same as the country being dooooooomed to european ostracism.

They were protecting their own interests as well with Catalonia and Flanders both likely to follow Scotland had it been a Yes vote.

Catalonia rather than Flanders, and the decidedly-not-Unionist press helped.

What's size got to do with it?
I might have made a wrong impression though, so I'll clarify a bit: I was in no way trying to ridicule the idea of independent Scotland per se. I was merely objecting to the notion that simply because Scotland could have gained independence by voting, Scots should have voted "aye!" - because "others have fought and died for such privilege!". That line of thought ignores that those who fought and died generally chose to because they were being violently oppressed.

What? Violently oppressed -by whom? By the ones they fought against or by the ones who sent them to war?

 

[Yeekim]

By those they chose to fight against.

 

[Arakhor]

You're probably more Scottish than I am! I wasn't even born here. I was born in Somerset, England. I'm Scottish/Irish/English, and I am super proud of that.

So you were born in the South and now live in the North, which is the reverse of my situation (northern England, rather than northern Britain). Of course, there are some who think that the UK needs stricter immigration laws, because of NIMBYs, you know.

 

[SeekTruthFromFacts]

So how come countries like Denmark (same size as Scotland), Sweden (about twice the size of Scotland, still hardly a giant) and the UK got to opt-out of the single currency and defence?

What *I* noticed about the referendum is how so many people were willing to downplay Scotland at every opportunity, saying things like "Sweden and the UK get it but it's doubtful Scotland would". Really? Sweden is so much more powerful and important than Scotland that they can get an opt-out we can't? What exactly has Sweden got that we don't (apart from much better looking women, better weather, living conditions etc etc)?

And the Danes were able to hold the EU to ransom on money and defence, yet poor, tiny, stupid little Scotland who already has all of this in the UK would be forced to give it up and do everything the EU says instead?

That's what bugs me about it. THAT is why Salmond told the EU what would happen to its sea trade if they even thought about it.

What Sweden had was EU membership. If Lee McCulloch went on strike at the start of s game, Rangers would be worried. If Warne Rooney threatened to strike, they wouldn't care two hoots because he's not a member of their club. Their respective skill levels are irrelevant.And if McCulloch went on strike at the start of the transfer window, he'd only hurt himself.

Denmark and Sweden were already members and had a veto on new Treaties. They could threaten a return to the status quo ante, which must always have some major flaw is the hassle of a new Treaty is being considered. Scotland would also gain veto power, but only *after* it was accepted as a member *and* a new Treaty came up. It's not about size, it's about legal status - you don't get a vote if you're not a member of the club.