Indyref 2 (2)

[phart]

Still 2 years away for Scottish elections? Not to be negative but it seems things are taking a turn for the worse globally in general. Be interesting to see the landscape in 2 years.

[Ally Bongo]

8 minutes ago, phart said:

Still 2 years away for Scottish elections? Not to be negative but it seems things are taking a turn for the worse globally in general. Be interesting to see the landscape in 2 years.

I read a piece from a military strategist regarding Iran's initial attack using mainly drones with some cruise and ballistic missiles

The narrative from the MSM is that it was an act of face saving from Iran after Israel took out some of their General Staff

What if however, that attack by Iran was to test Israel's defences so they can prepare for a proper attack ?

Iran is friendly with Russia and it's a baw hair from going tits up

[Malcolm]

45 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

I read a piece from a military strategist regarding Iran's initial attack using mainly drones with some cruise and ballistic missiles

The narrative from the MSM is that it was an act of face saving from Iran after Israel took out some of their General Staff

What if however, that attack by Iran was to test Israel's defences so they can prepare for a proper attack ?

Iran is friendly with Russia and it's a baw hair from going tits up

pretty dangerous situation just now.  It would be bad news if we end up with an all out war of Israel v Iran.

[Hertsscot]

34 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

pretty dangerous situation just now.  It would be bad news if we end up with an all out war of Israel v Iran.

I do wonder whether that was Hamas plan from the start. They must have known how Israel was going to react to the horrific events back in October. End game: get all their mates to pile in (possibly Iran egging them in from the start), wipe Israel of the map, job done. 

[Malcolm]

14 minutes ago, Hertsscot said:

I do wonder whether that was Hamas plan from the start. They must have known how Israel was going to react to the horrific events back in October. End game: get all their mates to pile in (possibly Iran egging them in from the start), wipe Israel of the map, job done. 

 

yeah, quite possibly.  I don’t think they will be able to wipe Israel off the map though- they have a nuclear capability.

[Ally Bongo]

28 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

 

yeah, quite possibly.  I don’t think they will be able to wipe Israel off the map though- they have a nuclear capability.

This was written in January

The odds of Iran now having a Nuclear weapon will be quite short

https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/detail/how-quickly-could-iran-make-nuclear-weapons-today

Institute For Science & International Security

The unfortunate reality is that Iran already knows how to build nuclear weapons, although there are some unfinished tasks related to the actual construction of them. If the regime’s leadership decided to build them, how would it proceed? How long would it take?

The long pole in the tent of building nuclear weapons is essentially complete. Iran can quickly make enough weapon-grade uranium for many nuclear weapons, something it could not do in 2003. Today, it would need only about a week to produce enough for its first nuclear weapon.³ It could have enough weapon-grade uranium for six weapons in one month, and after five months of producing weapon-grade uranium, it could have enough for twelve.

The other major poles in the tent are “nuclear weaponization” and delivery. Iran has a variety of delivery systems, including nuclear-capable missiles: the delivery pole is ready.

Weaponization is the pole that needs more work. It involves theoretical calculations and simulations; development, testing, and construction of the other components of the nuclear weapon; the conversion of weapon-grade uranium into metallic components; the integration of all the components into a nuclear weapon; and the preparation for mounting the weapons on aircraft or missiles or for use in a full-scale underground test. This pole includes the mastery of the high explosive triggering system, the molding and machining of high explosives, and the building of a neutron initiator that starts the chain reaction at just the right moment to create a nuclear explosion.

[hampden_loon2878]

3 hours ago, phart said:

Still 2 years away for Scottish elections? Not to be negative but it seems things are taking a turn for the worse globally in general. Be interesting to see the landscape in 2 years.

There is a massive opportunity for the snp in two years time, all they need to do is listen to me 🤣 sack humza after the GE replace him with Forbes and regain the centre ground.. 

[Malcolm]

40 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

This was written in January

The odds of Iran now having a Nuclear weapon will be quite short

https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/detail/how-quickly-could-iran-make-nuclear-weapons-today

Institute For Science & International Security

The unfortunate reality is that Iran already knows how to build nuclear weapons, although there are some unfinished tasks related to the actual construction of them. If the regime’s leadership decided to build them, how would it proceed? How long would it take?

The long pole in the tent of building nuclear weapons is essentially complete. Iran can quickly make enough weapon-grade uranium for many nuclear weapons, something it could not do in 2003. Today, it would need only about a week to produce enough for its first nuclear weapon.³ It could have enough weapon-grade uranium for six weapons in one month, and after five months of producing weapon-grade uranium, it could have enough for twelve.

The other major poles in the tent are “nuclear weaponization” and delivery. Iran has a variety of delivery systems, including nuclear-capable missiles: the delivery pole is ready.

Weaponization is the pole that needs more work. It involves theoretical calculations and simulations; development, testing, and construction of the other components of the nuclear weapon; the conversion of weapon-grade uranium into metallic components; the integration of all the components into a nuclear weapon; and the preparation for mounting the weapons on aircraft or missiles or for use in a full-scale underground test. This pole includes the mastery of the high explosive triggering system, the molding and machining of high explosives, and the building of a neutron initiator that starts the chain reaction at just the right moment to create a nuclear explosion.

mutually assured destruction with Israel then.

[StirlingEgg]

3 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

In that article above, Starmer mentions at least 3 or 4 times ‘ my changed Labour Party’ . He seems over keen to emphasise this and he is absolutely right , Labour have changed . Labour ARE now the Tory party . 

The quote I read about the commitment to a nuclear deterrent mentioned cyber crime and job security. I couldn't believe that's what was said - cyber crime and jobs are not reasons to spend billions on nuclear weapons. Christ, is this election going to be about who can wave the biggest red, white and blue willy? 😳 

[Hertsscot]

10 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

This was written in January

The odds of Iran now having a Nuclear weapon will be quite short

https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/detail/how-quickly-could-iran-make-nuclear-weapons-today

Institute For Science & International Security

I'm glad you mention what ISIS on line stands for. I was getting a bit worried!

[Malcolm]

Pete Wishart bemused by other pro independence candidates standing fornhis seat 😂😂😂😂

[scotlad]

16 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

😂 Frankenstein’s monster.

The polling is , as you say, horrendous. In a way, if the SNP were to lose control I would prefer it to be complete control as that is the only way people are going to see what the true alternative look likes. Wait till all the free stuff gets reversed. 
Yes, its a big risk , but IMO Labour will not be able to improve Scotland without more money,  and I cannot see a UK government , run by Labour , being any more successful than the other arse cheek thats on the way out. 

My preference of course would be for the SNP to take notice of public opinion before its too late, and also grow a backbone. 

That's a good point. If the Greens were part of any kind of coalition with Labour (Lorna Slater has all but said they would be prepared to go in with them) you would expect they would "keep them left", and use the retention of all or most of the free stuff as a bargain chip. The Lib Dems, I suspect, will just agree to anything in order to get back into government. 

Humza and his cohort need gone and pronto, IMO, but how would that happen unless he just resigns? A gubbing at the GE would force his hand in that respect, but for wider political reasons I don't want that to happen. Alternatively, under the party's constitution I think it is possible for another person to mount a leadership challenge at the annual conference, but even if that were to happen I wouldn't trust the membership not to re-elect Humza! 

16 hours ago, RanelaghScot said:

The most depressing part of the Westminster polls is knowing that if the election mirrors the polls we're going to have the likes of Dougie Alexander ripping the tap aff it across every communication channel spraffing about about how it's a clear rejection of independence and the country is wrapping itself up in the red white and blue of the union flag.

 

Another depressing idea is that the majority of the country / central belt still buys the "let's vote Labour and kick oot the Tories!" line..

It's even worse than that: Dougie, exuding levels of smugness that could power Hunterston B for a year, could also be back in his beloved Westminster. 

I can still remember celebrating the unctuous wee goblin getting his jotters in 2015 like a Scotland goal (sadly the person who replaced him quickly turned into a bit of a nyaff herself, IMO, but it was good at the time). 

[TDYER63]

16 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

47.7%

Why would the SNP push for another referendum when , at the very highest , the percentage was below the threshold required?  

Wings really thinks supporters of other parties are just going to lend the SNP their vote in an election? ( yes , I get the bit about the list vote)  What sort of research/polling has been done on the numbers surrounding this ? What sort of research has been done on how the public perceive this course of action? Yes, it’s attractive and gung ho to those strongly in favour of independence but I imagine a number of people could be put off by what they perceive to be an ‘ unconventional’ way of getting there. 

Or does the hard of thinking ( or to quote him in his  original piece’ the slow kids at the back’  ) only work one way with him? 

For that suggestion to have any chance of succeeding,  independence support and SNP support , would need to be a lot higher than it was then, never mind now. That is an entirely different conversation. 

[ThistleWhistle]

17 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

I read a piece from a military strategist regarding Iran's initial attack using mainly drones with some cruise and ballistic missiles

The narrative from the MSM is that it was an act of face saving from Iran after Israel took out some of their General Staff

What if however, that attack by Iran was to test Israel's defences so they can prepare for a proper attack ?

Iran is friendly with Russia and it's a baw hair from going tits up

Iran's biggest export markets for crude oil are China $500m and Uzbekistan $5m which adds a further dimension to this shit show.  

[TDYER63]

1 hour ago, scotlad said:

That's a good point. If the Greens were part of any kind of coalition with Labour (Lorna Slater has all but said they would be prepared to go in with them) you would expect they would "keep them left", and use the retention of all or most of the free stuff as a bargain chip. The Lib Dems, I suspect, will just agree to anything in order to get back into government. 

Humza and his cohort need gone and pronto, IMO, but how would that happen unless he just resigns? A gubbing at the GE would force his hand in that respect, but for wider political reasons I don't want that to happen. Alternatively, under the party's constitution I think it is possible for another person to mount a leadership challenge at the annual conference, but even if that were to happen I wouldn't trust the membership not to re-elect Humza! 

It's even worse than that: Dougie, exuding levels of smugness that could power Hunterston B for a year, could also be back in his beloved Westminster. 

I can still remember celebrating the unctuous wee goblin getting his jotters in 2015 like a Scotland goal (sadly the person who replaced him quickly turned into a bit of a nyaff herself, IMO, but it was good at the time). 

Wonder what influence the Greens would have with their ‘ controversial’ policies in a Labour coalition. I can absolutely guarantee 100% that there would be nothing like the media onslaught as there is just now. 

Not sure  how a battering at the GE would pan out but I doubt Humza would resign.  If the membership did re-elect him in a leadership challenge that would be the final straw for me. 

I remember being at the count for the first Holyrood election after the referendum. The Labour woman who lost was an absolute dragon.  Dressed in a pillar box red power suit she stood up and delivered a tirade of hatred , I was honestly quite shocked at how bitter she was. She did not even congratulate the winning candidate . Even the Tory guy had the decency to do that. 

[PapofGlencoe]

18 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

47.7%

It goes back to when Sturgeon intimated the Defacto vote. I was fully under the impression she had consulted (secretly) with the Greens, Alba, Socialists, Denis Canavan, Sheridan, a Right of centre Pro Yes coalition, Labour for Indy ...whoever and had a launch ready with a non-partisan Yes Scotland "Team Scotland" party as it was the best way to maximise and consolidate the vote.  I was fully expecting a launch like the Yes Scotland launch at Edinburgh castle.  

Polling at the time did show a majority of votes for the SNP (briefly) but a Defacto vote needed a non-partisan position to get the higher numbers required.

She clearly hadn't done any war-gaming before going to the Supreme Court.  It beggars belief.

Anyway, it's in the past now.  If Labour can't win in these circumstances, or even only narrowly, it shows Scotland has changed.  

 

[scotlad]

40 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Wonder what influence the Greens would have with their ‘ controversial’ policies in a Labour coalition. I can absolutely guarantee 100% that there would be nothing like the media onslaught as there is just now. 

Not sure  how a battering at the GE would pan out but I doubt Humza would resign.  If the membership did re-elect him in a leadership challenge that would be the final straw for me. 

I remember being at the count for the first Holyrood election after the referendum. The Labour woman who lost was an absolute dragon.  Dressed in a pillar box red power suit she stood up and delivered a tirade of hatred , I was honestly quite shocked at how bitter she was. She did not even congratulate the winning candidate . Even the Tory guy had the decency to do that. 

Good question. Scottish Labour, as everyone knows, are just puppets of Labour's London-based HQ. I think provided they keep their heads down and don't do anything controversial enough to make the news down south then Starmer will probably adopt the same attitude to HR as Blair adopted: let them get on with it.

I mind even Donald Dewar's first administration had to make concessions to the Lib Dems, most notably on tuition fees, which provoked some gurning down south but didn't really have much of an impact on Labour's overall performance, although Blair was pretty much bombproof at that point in time (this is before he started sanctioning actual bombs).

If the Greens were able to get any new "whacky" policies implemented under a Labour-led coalition they'd most probably be the ones slated for it - the exact opposite of what happens now, where it is the SNP who take the lion's share of the blame.

And if a Labour-led administration was under-performing in a particular area, the media "scrutiny" would be something like this:

"Anas Sarwar, such and such says your government's record on this is really bad, what do you have to say about that?"

"Well, let me be very clear...blah blah bloo bloo blee blee blah, the SNP left us in a mess, blah blah blah, CHANGE!"

"That's great, thank you for your time" ☺️ 

I think if the SNP could retain 30 seats or more at this year's GE then Humza would most probably keep him his job, unless he leave of his own volition for some reason. But aye, if there is a leadership challenge and he is re-elected then I would call it a day with them too - any party that elects Humza Yousaf as leader twice isn't the party for me! 😄

That Labour woman you described reminds me a wee bit of Pauline MacNeill's reaction when she won Glasgow Kelvin in 2007 - there are clips of it on YouTube still. I'd heard of bad losers before but that was one of the first times I'd seen a bad winner!

[stocky]

The wummun yoos Ur talking aboot wis probably  Maigret Curren 

 

Ah rite bitter, bitter auld hag, full of self importance and hatred for SNP.

 

Was Guid tae see her getting a do'in 

Edited April 15 by stocky

[Ally Bongo]

There is another west coast Labour witch - i can't remember her name

Blonde hair - was ousted ages ago and has nothing but bile for the SNP and Independence

Thick as shit too

[stocky]

31 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

There is another west coast Labour witch - i can't remember her name

Blonde hair - was ousted ages ago and has nothing but bile for the SNP and Independence

Thick as shit too

Irene Adams. Springs tae mind

[TDYER63]

58 minutes ago, stocky said:

The wummun yoos Ur talking aboot wis probably  Maigret Curren 

 

Ah rite bitter, bitter auld hag, full of self importance and hatred for SNP.

 

Was Guid tae see her getting a do'in 

Had a look. It was Mary Fee. 

[Ally Bongo]

41 minutes ago, stocky said:

Irene Adams. Springs tae mind

 

22 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Had a look. It was Mary Fee. 

There was another one - younger

Trying my best to remember - her twitter feed was continual vomit stuff

Aaid would remember - maybe had an irish sounding surname

[Ally Bongo]

1 hour ago, Ally Bongo said:

 

There was another one - younger

Trying my best to remember - her twitter feed was continual vomit stuff

Aaid would remember - maybe had an irish sounding surname

Remembered - Gemma Doyle

What a vicious rat she is/was

Notice she fucked off to London after her 2015 defeat and now spouts her anti SNP bile from there

[scotlad]

11 hours ago, PapofGlencoe said:

It goes back to when Sturgeon intimated the Defacto vote. I was fully under the impression she had consulted (secretly) with the Greens, Alba, Socialists, Denis Canavan, Sheridan, a Right of centre Pro Yes coalition, Labour for Indy ...whoever and had a launch ready with a non-partisan Yes Scotland "Team Scotland" party as it was the best way to maximise and consolidate the vote.  I was fully expecting a launch like the Yes Scotland launch at Edinburgh castle.  

Polling at the time did show a majority of votes for the SNP (briefly) but a Defacto vote needed a non-partisan position to get the higher numbers required.

She clearly hadn't done any war-gaming before going to the Supreme Court.  It beggars belief.

Anyway, it's in the past now.  If Labour can't win in these circumstances, or even only narrowly, it shows Scotland has changed.  

 

It really does beggar belief.

Nicola Sturgeon may be many things but she isn't stupid. A stupid person wouldn't have got as far as she has and dominated politics in this country for so long. For her to make such a pig's ear of a golden opportunity I find suspicious.

[TDYER63]

8 hours ago, scotlad said:

It really does beggar belief.

Nicola Sturgeon may be many things but she isn't stupid. A stupid person wouldn't have got as far as she has and dominated politics in this country for so long. For her to make such a pig's ear of a golden opportunity I find suspicious.

I personally think it was more arrogance , and that power you talk about,  thats the reason she didn’t seek an alliance. It might be more than that, but I think it’s far more likely she did not want to lose any control whatsoever. Its the downfall of many.