There is an argument for not politically splitting the territory of a small island. But when the advantages are examined, as some of them are here, it becomes clear that the proposed independence for Scotland will bring about a win-win situation. A win for Scottish citizens and a win for English citizens.
On September 18th 2014 the Scottish people will vote on achieving independence from the government of Westminster. If successful a Scottish government will be free to honour the wishes of the people. It will be able to rid itself of the appalling risks from the retention of nuclear weapons on their land and from the mad dangers of nuclear-power stations. It will no longer need to be involved in illegal and gratuitous wars at the behest of the US. The idea of a free Scotland electing to invade or drop bombs on another state is obviously ludicrous. Its taxes will be used to further the wellbeing of the citizens rather than fund foreign adventures instigated by an irresponsible and unaccountable power elite. All this will be of huge advantage to the citizens of England also. It will surely help to clarify the way that they are used by those with a different agenda; those who are intent on boosting their own power regardless of the detrimental effects on citizens.
Below is laid out the nuclear way a free Scotland could benefit both the citizens of Scotland and of England.
When the Westminster government wanted to build one of the most dangerous types of nuclear-power station, namely a fast-breeder reactor, in order to manufacture plutonium for its thermal-nuclear bombs, they, understandably, made sure it was as far away from Westminster as physically possible, consistent with keeping it on The UK mainland. They chose Dounreay on the very most northerly part of the Scottish coast. Five reactors were built on the site. The management was appalling. An estimated hundreds of thousands of irradiated fuel particles were left on the seabed and the beach - which has been closed since 1983 because of the danger(1). The last reactor was closed down in 1994 and was so dangerous that a robot had to be used to work on the decommissioning, a decommissioning that is by no means complete. Twenty years later a large workforce is still being used in the attempt to make the site safe. The plan is to complete the cleanup by 2022-25(2) and to convert it to a brownfield site by 2336(3) -- three hundred and forty-two years after closure! No wonder they wanted it as far away as possible! The total cost of cleanup is expected to be around 2.9 billion(4)!
The Scottish people, like those in Germany and other parts of the world, realise that nuclear-power stations are both hopelessly dangerous and unnecessary(5) (Fukushima, three years after three concurren t meltdowns, is still out of control and spewing radiation across Japan and the planet and into the Pacific Ocean). A free Scotland will be powered by safe and sustainable forms of energy.
This will be greatly advantageous for the people of England the majority of who do not want new nuclear power. In spite of being kept substantially in the dark about the terrors of Fukushima, only 37% said they would accept new nuclear-power stations(6). When the citizens of England see that just across the border citizens of Scotland can have their wishes honoured they will demand the same in England.
We must acknowledge the consistency of the Westminster establishment in nuclear matters. In order to 'get their feet under the top table' they wanted to have a nuclear arsenal. But they were aware of the appalling dangers from accidents and terrorist attacks. Once again the answer was clear. Get them as far away from Westminster as possible. Having decided on a fleet of nuclear submarines, each one able to carry 48 thermo-nuclear bombs and each one of these with a destructive power at least seven times that of the Hiroshima bomb, they made sure that they were parked in the most northerly river that would hold them, not the Severn, not the Mersey or the Tyne, but the Clyde. Well across the border in Scotland! Scotland wants them out.
If a man walks into a crowd brandishing a gun he is correctly seen as a threat to the people in the crowd. A state brandishing a nuclear arsenal is correctly seen as a threat to humanity. The rejection of the Westminster nuclear arsenal shows that a majority of the Scottish people want no part of this appalling threat to the rest of the world, which Desmond Tutu called 'obscene'.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).