Vote Yes and stop being the target of terrorism?

[Jamaldo]

Is this on here already?

http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/isis-targeted-scot-to-force-a-yes-vote-in-referendum-1.562793

That is quite an incredible piece of scaremongering.

[Well Well]

When the British establishment can sink this low to project fear from a poor desperate hostage for referendum purposes you know it is only going to get worse.

[QPSAFalkirkFirm]

I remember Brian Stagecoach on one of the debates was the only panelist to answer this question, given the rest were politicians it's hardly suprising. He said commonsense told him that Scotland would be safer and said other small nations were not threatened by terrorism, what a load of pish. Commonsense probably also told him to wear that sky blue suit jacket.

Commonsense tells me that an iScotland may become less of a target but it would definitely more susceptible to a major actual attack.

1. Would AQ forget our past involvment in middle east wars? Not sure how their minds would work especially as they were the started by the Governments we voted for .

2. Yes campaign tends to compare itself with small european countries like Norway and Belgium when it suits but didn't on this occasion, I wonder why?

Not too suprised the BT did not bring any of this up as it would be shouted down as project fear. I reckon I feel pretty safe today with proven inteligence agencies protecting us and would less safe in an iScotland.

Any Yes or BT think differently?

When you say "major actual attack" were you thinking of a nuclear first strike by, say, Russia aimed at the nuclear weapon facility at Faslane? Like we have now.

When you refer to your common sense, do you even know how to spell that?

When you say AQ, is that Ali Qurban who runs the wee shop at the High station? Haven't you noticed the Yanks have dropped Al Q'aeda and created a new silly name for the various bands of disparate gangsters who murder civilians in Arabia.

Brian Stagecoach started as a coach driver. Old habits die hard.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

The Stockholm bombing shows that no country can be complacent when it comes to terrorism.

[strichener]

The Stockholm bombing shows that no country can be complacent when it comes to terrorism.

Yes and the hit and run in Beith today shows that you should build a bridge over every road before you cross it. In other news, all bridges are to be abolished to reduce suicide rates.

It is absolutely impossible to prevent terrorist attacks. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded.

[F_T_Y]

It is absolutely impossible to prevent terrorist attacks. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded.

I would say if you don't invade other countries they won't attack you back.

No more guilt by association of illegal British wars,another reason to vote yes.

[Granny Danger]

The Stockholm bombing shows that no country can be complacent when it comes to terrorism.

No one should be complacent when it comes to mental health issues.

[Hearts Daft]

Yep. Just keep our troops out and LET Al Qaeda win.

Disgusting.

TBF, if we sent our troops into everywhere someone shouted "Allahu Akhbar" during a murder (which seems to be your idea of terrorism) we'd run out of troops.

[Confidemus]

The Stockholm bombing shows that no country can be complacent when it comes to terrorism.

And any military advisor will tell you that armies do not stop terrorism.

[throbber]

I have thought this all along about independence. I also could be wrong in some places but it seems pretty obvious to me there are far more islam related tensions in English cities as there are in Scotland. Im pretty sure such tensions are non existent in Edinburgh

[Ross.]

I remember Brian Stagecoach on one of the debates was the only panelist to answer this question, given the rest were politicians it's hardly suprising. He said commonsense told him that Scotland would be safer and said other small nations were not threatened by terrorism, what a load of pish. Commonsense probably also told him to wear that sky blue suit jacket.

Commonsense tells me that an iScotland may become less of a target but it would definitely more susceptible to a major actual attack.

1. Would AQ forget our past involvment in middle east wars? Not sure how their minds would work especially as they were the started by the Governments we voted for .

2. Yes campaign tends to compare itself with small european countries like Norway and Belgium when it suits but didn't on this occasion, I wonder why?

Not too suprised the BT did not bring any of this up as it would be shouted down as project fear. I reckon I feel pretty safe today with proven inteligence agencies protecting us and would less safe in an iScotland.

Any Yes or BT think differently?

The last time there was an attempt at a terrorist attack in Scotland, the perpetrator got his balls kicked by a baggage handler.

In fact, the best comment I have heard on this kind of thing was from a representative of the mosque that the recent "Aberdeen Jihadist" was a member. He said something along the lines of "You can't hold us all responsible because one of the locals has gone commando". That sums it up. You will always get individuals who, for one reason or another, are beyond reach and sadly go that way. The fact is we have had terrorist attacks in Scotland as part of the UK. The UK does not offer absolute protection from that, just as independence wouldn't.

I would say if you don't invade other countries they won't attack you back.

No more guilt by association of illegal British wars,another reason to vote yes.

This is 100% correct. We need to distance ourselves from US and Westminster foreign policy in that respect. We are a target now because we are on their side. If we stay out of it they won't give a sh*t about us.

[BerwickMad]

Yeah, a cowardly foreign policy is the way forward eh! Let others deal with it. If only we'd done that in WW2.

[Ross.]

Yeah, a cowardly foreign policy is the way forward eh! Let others deal with it. If only we'd done that in WW2.

There is a difference between being cowardly and getting involved continuously in disputes that you have gone someway towards causing by getting involved in their affairs continuously.

[BerwickMad]

So just ignore it all and watch as IS murder hundreds of people at a time. You might be comfortable with that, but I'd like to think most aren't.

[Ross.]

So just ignore it all and watch as IS murder hundreds of people at a time. You might be comfortable with that, but I'd like to think most aren't.

If you can point me to where I said that I would greatly appreciate it. You can't though, because I didn't.

[BerwickMad]

If you can point me to where I said that I would greatly appreciate it. You can't though, because I didn't.

You want to 'stay out of it' incase you become a target. If that doesn't mean do nothing, then could you suggest your alternative?

[Ross.]

You want to 'stay out of it' incase you become a target. If that doesn't mean do nothing, then could you suggest your alternative?

The stay out of it comment was more to do with the initial invasion of Iraq in mind a few years back, something that went ahead despite widespread public opposition to it. If we hadn't invaded then, the current situation might be very different.

Scotland should always have a role in peacekeeping and mediation where it is needed.

[Confidemus]

So just ignore it all and watch as IS murder hundreds of people at a time. You might be comfortable with that, but I'd like to think most aren't.

This is indicative of the British mentality.

Who made us the world's police? Why do we feel the need to wade into every conflict?

I'd rather iScotland just stayed the f**k out of it.

[BerwickMad]

If it is inductive of the British mentality, I'm happy that it is. I would hope that an independent Scotland wouldn't just sit back and cowardly watch on. Nothing to do with being world police.

[Gordon EF]

Regardless of what went before, I'd support iScotland helping to get rid of IS. It's something I'm broadly in agreement with what the British government are saying about it.