Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:48 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 36925
Location: Wayneistan
Independence referendum: Alex Salmond's plans on defence and security don't stack up, says Defence Secretary



PHILIP Hammond says these issues need to be debated now with just over a year before Scots go to the polls.


THE Defence Secretary has attacked "insultingly vague" plans for an independent Scottish defence force.

The Scottish National Party's (SNP) proposals do not stack up or come with enough of a spending commitment, Philip Hammond told an invited audience in Edinburgh.

"Defence and security should be at the heart of this debate about Scotland's future and yet, just over a year before the Scottish people go to the polls, the commitments from those proposing independence remain almost insultingly vague, implausibly long on ambition and incredibly short on detail and the means to deliver them," he said.

"I ask myself why? Might it be that they know that any properly informed and well-reasoned analysis will demonstrate that Scotland is stronger and more secure as an integral part of the UK than it would be alone?

"The reality is that, as part of the UK, Scotland benefits from every pound invested in our collective security."

Ships would not be built in Scotland if voters decided to back independence in the referendum in autumn next year, he said.

Mr Hammond was heavily criticised in Scotland last week when he announced that the number of troops north of the border will increase by about 600, far fewer than the thousands promised in 2011 by his predecessor, Liam Fox.

Although focused on the SNP's plans, Mr Hammond also warned people in the rest of the UK that overall defence capabilities could be harmed if Scotland leaves the Union.

The system is shared across borders and cannot be broken off like a bar of chocolate, he said.

Pilots guarding northern airspace are helped by personnel at a base in Northumberland, Mr Hammond said.

He accused SNP politicians of "juvenile" behaviour for assuming that serving soldiers in the British Army would want to volunteer for the proposed Scottish defence force.

The "share" of military assets would not include enough hardware.

Scotland could inherit one-and-a-half destroyers, five Chinook helicopters and "under one Red Arrow" among other assets, he said.

The SNP argues that it would have 15,000 serving personnel in defence forces and that it would get rid of Trident nuclear weapons.

The annual budget for defence and security would be met by about £2.5 billion, according to the party's Westminster leader, Angus Robertson.

Mr Hammond said the UK Government's plan for the future of the Armed Forces demonstrate a "commitment" to Scotland.

"An independent Scotland would have to build its defence credibility and its intelligence reliability from scratch and develop its own bilateral relationships, and the success of these would depend in part on what Scotland can offer in return," he said.

"I note the claim made by Angus Robertson that, on independence, Scotland will inherit its treaty obligations. The reality is that it would be the rest of the UK that would inherit Nato membership. An applicant Scotland would need all 28 member nations to decide that it met the requirements to join, taking into account its defence policy, including its intended budget, capabilities, missions and objectives."

Attacking the "credibility" of the SNP's plan to inherit a share of the UK military, he said: "That, to me, sounds like a high-level shopping list based upon a fundamental misunderstanding of how defence works and how military effect is generated: the chocolate bar approach that pretends you can just break a chunk off a bigger entity and it works as a standalone force."

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/polit ... ty-1763002

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 8326
Alex Salmonds main plan is to have no credible plan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
Hammond and credibility are mutually exclusive terms.

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 9:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 12834
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
what does scotland need an army for ? If anyone invades just line a couple of dozen men up and get them to lift their kilts it worked in the movies :lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously though I would have thought that bringing part of the current British army under Scottish control would be straightforward after all most of the facilities are already in existence as long as there is sufficient finance available to pay for the running costs

_________________
Taxis Are Public Transport too

Join the campaign to get April fools jokes banned for 364 days a year !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 11:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 8326
edders23 wrote:
what does scotland need an army for ? If anyone invades just line a couple of dozen men up and get them to lift their kilts it worked in the movies :lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously though I would have thought that bringing part of the current British army under Scottish control would be straightforward after all most of the facilities are already in existence as long as there is sufficient finance available to pay for the running costs


Just see it now, the Alex Salmond Foot in mouth Battalion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
bloodnock wrote:
edders23 wrote:
what does scotland need an army for ? If anyone invades just line a couple of dozen men up and get them to lift their kilts it worked in the movies :lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously though I would have thought that bringing part of the current British army under Scottish control would be straightforward after all most of the facilities are already in existence as long as there is sufficient finance available to pay for the running costs


Just see it now, the Alex Salmond Foot in mouth Battalion.


You'd make an excellent C.O. :lol:

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 8326
gusmac wrote:
bloodnock wrote:
edders23 wrote:
what does scotland need an army for ? If anyone invades just line a couple of dozen men up and get them to lift their kilts it worked in the movies :lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously though I would have thought that bringing part of the current British army under Scottish control would be straightforward after all most of the facilities are already in existence as long as there is sufficient finance available to pay for the running costs


Just see it now, the Alex Salmond Foot in mouth Battalion.


You'd make an excellent C.O. :lol:

#-o


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group