If Scotland were to become independent (as a Scot, I could not think of anything more abhorrent and disloyal than the destruction of the UK; however, I am more than confident that IF a referendum is called, the Scots will say no) - the SNP would actively seek the creation of a NEUTRAL state.

This would be a most dramatic change to Scotland. As a people, the Scots have never been belligerent; however, they are not afraid of a fight either. Throughout history, the Scottish people have forged alliances with other powers to secure their national interest (and survival) - France first, and England eventually ;). A united homeland gave the nation (UK) the ability to fight abroad, creating vast wealth and allowing us to fight powers and wars that would have crippled us otherwise.

The UK is a founder of the Western World - and the vanguard of Western power is NATO. The alliance spared the continent (and perhaps this Island) from the scourge of Soviet Russia - a nation that had ample power and might to sweep across and subjugate all the ancient capitals of Europe - the collective security of NATO guaranteed peace and Europe has been at peace for decades.

The SNP would change all this. Isolationist in view, the SNP resolutely fail to support the alliance that has maintained the European peace - and it is no falsehood to state that, as a party, the SNP are the ONLY party (in power) in ALL of Europe that do not support the alliance (apart from the fence sitters). An independent Scotland would obviously seek foreign investment from all quarters - could you imagine a greater slap in the face to the USA (presumably the greatest source of investment) than a scottish government refusing their offer of collective security; especially when the links between our peoples are so strong - indeed, it has been said that the Scots-Irish RULE america.

The SNP must explain why they do not support NATO. Coupled with their disarmament policy and plans for a GREATLY reduced military - Scotland would be more exposed than ever in the history of the nation. Scotland would begin a new era in the hope that any potential enemies would "respect" its neutrality. For shame.

History is often thought of as the best teacher mankind has - it has taught us that neutrality is perhaps the greatest folly for any nation. A respected fighting people would part with centuries of tradition all on the short sighted whim of anti-American, isolationist, separatist and dangerous rebels. If the neutral countries of World war 2 allied with the great powers - there could have been time enough to fortify the low countries and Hitler may have been stopped in his tracks. The world is not a united place - and some countries have yet to have their "place in the sun", and when they catch on to the power of nationalism, it will be dangerous for us all. People are being seriously naive if they think China is just going to stay in its box when they become the worlds economy.

Of course, this would never come to pass if the scottish people say no - which I am sure they will. The SNP plan to ask the people in 2010 (legally, the have no power to do so) - If labour improve their poll rating, it would be in the interest of the UK government for a pre-emptive plebiscite as it could control the question (where "separation" would be more favourable to the positive connotation of "independence") - this of course should have been done immediately after the SNP won, in order to totally undermine them at the very beginning.

Unfortunately, the will of our leadership is rather lacking; and I appreciate the problems that it would pose in regards to the Lisbon treaty - but if the SNP plan to ask the people anyway, the UK should move first for it has played second fiddle to the rebels for far to long. Their lack of support for NATO would surely play a large part in the NO campaign.  

Writing in the Observer, the Prime Minister makes it abundantly clear that Russian aggression must be met by determined EU action and a "root and branch" review in regards to our relations with the Russian state. Funding is also called for to build a new pipeline bypassing Russia. 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/31/russia.georgia

There are dark rumors circling that Russia is away to turn off the gas to certain member states, depending on the EU response on Monday. It looks like the UK will be backing a strong stance as will presumably France. Italy is league with the enemy and its anyone's guess what Germany will say, after all - they will probably suffer worst of all if Russia really wants to make an enemy of Europe.

At least the Prime Minister is now telling us what he thinks. He has established his authority and has taken the correct tone. The UK has taken the lead in European criticism of Russia - lets see if our allies do the same.

The anti-nuclear lobby can go and take a running jump. We have never needed security of supply more than now. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7561926.stm

Looks like the missile shield deal has to been finalised, signed and sealed.

Both the US and Poland must have felt the time was right - indeed, it is clear an old enemy is up to new tricks.

The Question is - what is EUROPE and the US going to do when Russia inevitably points its missiles at POLAND and NATO?