Viv said:
I think it's quite likely that the British government wanted Scotland to vote yes. If they weren't prepared to let Scotland go they would not have allowed a referendum.
They've been trying to stop this referendum from happening since WW2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM0JsBjcx2E
It fits with the E.U agenda of a Europe of regions.
Scotland has been designated a region. The British govt is a devoted servant of the E.U.
The plan to break up the Uk will continue regardless of democracy. Already David Cameron is talking about more devolution for the different parts of Britain.
England will be split up into regions to render it powerless, and London is planned to become a detached city state.
By who? The 'Powers That Be'? Why would they
want to weaken what is arguably the second of their 'Two Towers' (Washington and London)?
What you're witnessing are the death throes of the London regime. No one is 'planning' this - they're consequences of previous actions.
The laughable thing about this Scotland-in-EU issue is that it has been
assumed by the British media, London, Brussels, and YesScotland campaign leaders that Scots want to remain part of the EU. Let's pretend that's true. The European Commission's contribution to the Scottish independence campaign was to suggest that there would be a 5-year moratorium on the admittance of new members. In other words, their message to Scotland was, "Ooh, we're not sure about letting you in... we're a prestigious club y'know... Gosh, it's gonna cost you some... Hang on, we'll get back to you."
Between the lines, by saying they would have to 'reapply' for EU membership, Brussels was threatening to expel Scots and Catalonians from the EU. Now, countries run by normal people in normal times might ordinarily accept that with glee, but the way it has been presented in Western media for the last two years is that not being in the EU is like being excommunicated from civilization.
It's all pure bluff. The EU is willing to admit
Ukraine, for crying out loud! In addition, I'm sure at least some Eurocrats are aware that Scotland is "Europe's Kuwait." [See above video re Scottish oil and gas] They would be DELIGHTED for Scotland to be an EU member, given Europe's dependency on Russian energy. In fact, if an independent Scotland had been told it would have to reapply (it wouldn't have needed to; Brussels would have bent the rules because it needs Scotland), and had NOT done so, they'd have changed their tune very quickly and found some way to induce Scotland - forcibly, if necessary - to 're-enter' the EU.
It would be as simple as that if we weren't dealing with a ponerized system. There are competing interests and levels of motivation involved.The interests of the E.U are not the same as the interests of the member states. The interests of the state are not the same as the interests of politicians.
I dunno. I don't see much difference between the whole lot of them. Elites in 'The West' - the US + Canada + EU + Australia/New Zealand - all talk and behave 'as if of one mind', like some kind of zombie hive mind. Secession (to some extent or another) from the Western system is a healthy reaction to that. It's new, it's creative, and it's different. Tyrants hate new, creative and different. They want everything locked down; easier to control that way.
States like Spain which have provinces to lose will put up some resistance, but the power is in Brussels so they will be forced to give way.
Brussels is dead set against Scotland and Catalonia breaking away from their local tethers, because then they are harder to control. And the Eurocrats made their position clear very early on:
Brussels is hostile to Scottish independence 'because it is weak'
Alex Salmond's case for independence has been struck a severe blow by José Manuel Barroso
The Guardian, 11 December 2012
Europe fears Scottish independence contagion
David Cameron and his wretched Conservative Party would have stood a better chance of winning the next general election with Scotland out of the Union.
Phew! Now Brits can look forward to 10 years under Labour. How'd that work out for them last time around?
It's quite possible that the vote was rigged, and the main purpose of the referendum was to cause division and ill-feeling in order to weaken the Union. If this is the case it seems to be working.
You're suggesting this was an intended outcome? By Brussels?! Consider that the EU doesn't do anything without US permission. So then why would the US support the weakening of its only reliable ally?
No, the weakening of the Union is the natural consequence of Scots saying, "No more, we've had enough of your warmongering ways."
My respect for George Galloway has risen considerably. He hasn't lost the plot at all. If he were standing in my constituency he would have my vote, not that voting ever makes any difference.
Mine has diminished considerably. On this issue, he finds himself on the wrong side of the fence from the 'working class' he claims to represent - in both Scotland and the rest of the UK. The Westminster vote on launching Iraq War III was timed so that it came immediately after the referendum. The Western war machine's operations in Syria and Iraq began in earnest after that, once they knew 'Air-strip One' (the UK) would remain intact. At least, their operations only began to be heavily
publicized after that.
It's information warfare: projecting the
appearance of UK unity was important to maintaining the illusion that the Western masses support the Empire's wars. The illusion of unity, 'coalitions of the willing', and 'core coalitions' are crucial for 'legitimizing' what they do. If London suddenly had a constitutional crisis on its hands, it might not be deploying 'British' jets to bomb Iraq/Syria. But it isn't the UK's military hardware that Washington needs: it needs 'friends in war' in order to pretend that 'the world community' supports its imperial designs.
London would have had to deal with more pressing issues, and the overall Western war machine would have been negatively impacted with no dominant European ally strongly in favor of more war. The next most reliable ally for the US is France.
Given Galloway's anti-war stance and staunch defence of Muslim interests, the truly horrific thing about his irrational arguments against Scottish independence is that he has just unwittingly assisted the Empire with killing more Muslims.