[Closed] Faslane

Glasgow is right next door. There's a good chance the entire population would be wiped out or die lingering and painful deaths. I wonder why they didn't place this base in London?

It's a long way from the Thames to the GUIK gap. It's not that far from the Clyde.

epicyclo - Member
winston_dog - Member
...Scottish Navy? What will that consist of?
The ships they are intending to build on the Clyde for the Scottish navy.

Really? What for? Are you going to invade the Isle of Man?

epicyclo - Member
winston_dog - Member
...Scottish Navy? What will that consist of?
The ships they are intending to build on the Clyde for the Scottish navy.

Really? What for? Are you going to invade the Isle of Man?

Why wouldn't Scotland want its own Navy? With the length of coastline present it would be daft not to.

Not as daft as you right enough you ignorant twunt.

winston_dog - Member
epicyclo - Member
winston_dog - Member
...Scottish Navy? What will that consist of?
The ships they are intending to build on the Clyde for the Scottish navy.
Really? What for? Are you going to invade the Isle of Man?

I think they're minesweepers for sinking foreign nuclear subs in our waters. 🙂

Dunno actually. Probably to protect oil and fishery assets.

Comes in, has a quick look around and scuttles off again so as not to get told off again for not liking slimy Alex...

I think they're minesweepers for sinking foreign nuclear subs in our waters.

Dunno actually. Probably to protect oil and fishery assets.

How would a minesweeper sink a sub?

Why wouldn't Scotland want its own Navy? With the length of coastline present it would be daft not to.

Not as daft as you right enough you ignorant twunt.

OOOhhhh! A twunt I may be but on this subject I am not ignorant!

Winston_dog .Where is the evidence of your lack of ignorance? Facts are conspicuous by their absence from your statements.

He hasn't demonstrated any ignorance. Albeit in a piss taking manner; he's asked a valid question, seeing as how we know salmond has stated the desire for a defence force rather than a proper military.

Where is the evidence of your lack of ignorance?

That's not how it works.

Comes in, has a quick look around and scuttles off again so as not to get told off again for not liking slimy Alex...

Liking Alex Salmond or not has nothing to do with independence.

OK. So the Scots are going to keep Military Warship building going on the Clyde after independence.

This is a facility that is struggling to stay open when it is building warships for the 5th biggest Navy in the World.

How is it going to stay open supplying ships for a "Scottish Defence Force"? Which will probably have a requirement for a few multi role patrol vessels?

Does Alex want to be an arms dealer and supply military systems to any dodgy state which wants them?

I was more thinking of the assertion that the mod is lying as their figures do not support the better together case.

'Does Alex want to be an arms dealer and supply military systems to any dodgy state which wants them?'
Isnt that the nature of the arms industry throughout the world?

Of course Scotland needs their own military

Wee Eck is planning to return Scotland to its former glory - he's off to Panama to recapture the Isthmus of Darien 😀

By the way:

The Spanish constitution prevents the splitting up of the Spanish nation so the circumstances are completely different.

So does the Scottish one:

Article 1 (name of the new kingdom)
That the Two Kingdoms of Scotland and England, shall upon the 1st May next ensuing the date hereof, [b]and forever after,[/b] be United into One Kingdom by the Name of GREAT BRITAIN: And that the Ensigns Armorial of the said United Kingdom be such as Her Majesty shall think fit, and used in all Flags, Banners, Standards and Ensigns both at Sea and Land.

Isnt that the nature of the arms industry throughout the world?

Yes of course it is, but I was under the impression that Alex didn't want his Kingdom to get involved in that sort of business?

There would be a lot of money around from not paying for the trident replacement. There's a big challenge ahead for shipbuilders in the event of a yes vote though. I'm still of the opinion that faslane does have a future without trident given the MoD figures.

winston_dog - Member
"I think they're minesweepers for sinking foreign nuclear subs in our waters."

How would a minesweeper sink a sub?

Easy. First you ram the subs snorkel, then the crew gathers at the rail and piddles down the snorkel tube. The sub fills up and then sinks. Simple, eh?

Dunno why I said minesweepers - the word should have been frigates or something similar.

I'm not quite sure why you will need even patrol vessels as we will be keeping the oil and the fishing rights after we divorce you.
Alex cannot be trusted with such valuable assets.

winston_dog - Member
I'm not quite sure why you will need even patrol vessels as we will be keeping the oil and the fishing rights after we divorce you.
Alex cannot be trusted with such valuable assets.

Mmm, we may have to send you some presents from Faslane if you try that... 🙂

There is a lot of inane drivel in Winstons posts on this topic.

Funny clip from a great film IMO, however not making much of a point. About as valid a portrayal of Scottish life as Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is of inner city London. Think of another witty stereotype while I finish off a deep fried mars bar for breakfast.

Winston_dog you really ought to read the book.

I don't see how an independent Scotland could sustain a warship build industry or a deployable navy.

The UK defence build industry is limping by as we speak - in recent times (last 10years ish) we've built 6 ships with another 2 on their way. The future frigates arent guaranteed to be built in the UK (although I agree it's highly likely) so the throughput is so small it almost makes retaining the entire ship build infrastructure and skill sets almost pointless (from a business perspective anyway).

Secondly although Faslane could easily accommodate a navy - we've parked aircraft carriers in there before - one base for your national maritime force is clearly a target for would-be aggressors - you would be wise to spread your assets across 2 or more sites. So is there appetite to build another base - back in Rosyth for example?

Finally ships are built to work in groups so Scotland would need a number of types. Frigates are good anti-submarine hunters but really need a helicopter to make them work at their best. Hey can't offer air defence capability so you're looking at a supporting group of destroyers. These ships are a bit loud and grey so something stealthy and black to work "upstream" might be nice - so we're into the area of submarine ownership. Faslane has a number of routes in and out (once you're out of the loch) but nevertheless mining the entrance is easily achieved so you're going to need some mine hunters and sweepers too. So if you follow current wisdom you'd be looking at a navy only a bit smaller than our current one!

Of course you can just go down the coastal defence force line with the sole intent of defending coastline (fishery protection etc) and if it really goes belly up phone yer mates just the other side of your southern border.

Just my opinion obviously...

Of course you can just go down the coastal defence force line with the sole intent of defending coastline (fishery protection etc) and if it really goes belly up phone yer mates just the other side of your southern border.

Which is of course the sensible route, because an independent Scotland won't have the means or the motive to engage in military conflicts around the world. Most small countries manage without all that expensive floating hardware. England doesn't need it either, all this is based on a romantic "Britannia Rules The Waves" vision.

Occurs to me:

[i]"There are 520 civilian jobs at HM Naval Base Clyde, including Coulport and Faslane, that directly rely upon the Trident programme,"[/i]

Thats stating the jobs that rely on the trident programme - thats the missile system

It doesn't discuss the number of jobs that rely directly upon the vanguard submarines that carry them

And of course the other nuclear submarines that are based there - which have a similar logistic chain to the Vanguard, food, torpedo's, electronics, etc - if you move vanguard, then you move astute as well

and then there's the other nuclear weapons that would be based at coulport - depth charges etc, including nato stockpiles, that we would have to move to somewhere else.

so the jobs dictated as being reliant on trident, are just part of the overall picture of jobs that would be lost, because of you lose nuclear weapons, you essentially lose the whole reason for the NATO logistics chain to be located there.

Secondly although Faslane could easily accommodate a navy - we've parked aircraft carriers in there before

Didn't go so well last time we parked one there for the night 😯

bencooper - Member

The People's Empire of the North, Ireland and Scotland.

I like what you did there. 🙂

Most small countries manage without all that expensive floating hardware. England doesn't need it either, all this is based on a romantic "Britannia Rules The Waves" vision.

That's not entirely true, depending on what you mean by "need".

The Royal Navy is a very important asset when pursuing British neocolonialist policies. The Iraq War for example, in which the RN played a vital role, had very little to do with Iraqi weapons of mass destruction which were threaten the UK and a great deal to do with accessing Iraqi oil for UK companies.

[url= http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/19/britain-iraq-oil-idUSLDE73I00J20110419 ]UK held talks with oil firms before Iraq invasion[/url]

[i]"Then trade minister Elizabeth Symons assured the oil group that the government believed British energy firms should be given a share of Iraq's oil and gas reserves, given Blair's commitment to U.S. plans."[/i]

British global military reach clearly helped to secure financial rewards for British companies which would not have been forthcoming if the RN had stayed in home waters.

The Empire might no longer exist but neocolonialism is a reality. Though it's worth remembering though that despite the propaganda British neocolonialism, like British imperialism before it, does not actually benefit the vast majority of ordinary British people - it simply facilitates the accumulation of wealth and inequality. EG, petrol isn't cheaper on the forecourts because Iraqi oil is now owned by British companies rather than Iraqi companies, despite the fact that ordinary British people have paid a very heavy price to secure Iraqi oil through taxation, and of course in blood.

British imperialism/neocolonialism "needs" a global military reach, the British people don't.

The jobs thing also need to be rethought - do we really want defence industry jobs?

It's funny that the same people who moan loudly about the cost of unemployment benefits are often very much in favour of very expensive make-work jobs in the defence industries. BAE Systems is the biggest benefits scrounger there is.

Secondly although Faslane could easily accommodate a navy - we've parked aircraft carriers in there before
Didn't go so well last time we parked one there for the night

If we're thinking about the same incident about 5 years ago then you'd be right! I was onboard for that one!

I thought it was hilarious! Arrived in work that morning to see hundreds of of matelows hanging around the NAAFI looking totally lost and like they'd just left the pub/club 😀

Ben,

I reckon that argument worth both ways to because very often those campaigning to keep British heavy industry going and prevent places like the shipyards and vickers closing are thoroughly opposed to. The military industrial complex and arms trading.

[img] [/img]

Why does that submarine still have union flags on it?

Surely if we leave the UK ben, the rest of the UK can fly what ever flag they like. It would not be Scotlands place to declare that the Saltire should be removed.

I think we should keep the flag as is, just to annoy the Scots....

Ahhhh isn't that nice ff a little memento of something that would no longer exist after a yes vote

Sounds a bit final. What would not exist gordimhor? Even the 'great' leader of the yes campaign is attempting a relaunch. Apparently a social and royal union will still exist. I would not be happy in the least at the breakup of the UK.

What would make you 'not happy' athgray? I'd like to turn the question round, from 'why become in dependant?' To 'why remain in the union?'

We are conditioned to believe that the union is normality, when in reality, across the world, independent countries are the norm.

I've lived in the west of Scotland all my life, and can't see what a Westminster mp has done for my area. I'd rather take the gamble, and I admit it's a ****in huge gamble, that a local msp may actually do more for my community than some ****in Tory Tarquin.

Would the orange order be pissed off with scotland for breaking up the union?

The Orange Order have already come out against independence.

Does that mean that every catholic will vote Yes?

British imperialism/neocolonialism "needs" a global military reach, the British people don't.

[quote=glupton1976 ]Does that mean that every catholic will vote Yes?
I wouldn't have thought so.

Who, in reality, gives a flying **** what the orange order thinks?