MARGARET Thatcher set a very dangerous precedent when she used the South Atlantic War to boost her waning popularity. Both John Major and then Tony Blair followed suit by committing to the first and second Gulf Wars. David Cameron did his best by getting involved in conflicts in Libya and Syria following the so-called Arab Spring.
We now face an altogether more frightening prospect with tension growing along the border between Ukraine and Russia. The more Boris Johnson comes under pressure at home, the more eagerly he will be watching developments and hoping to become the next prime minister to wade into an international conflict as commander-in-chief of British forces, heedless of death and destruction caused many hundreds of miles from his home.
READ MORE: UK troops will be deployed if Russia invades Ukraine, Boris Johnson pledges
Going to war with a nuclear power would put Scotland right on the front line and is too high a price to bolster a prime minister whose coat currently hangs on the shoogliest of pegs. Diplomacy is a much better option but Johnson lacks the capacity and is more likely impatient for a confrontation that he may hope would bring some reflected glory to his tarnished leadership.
We must get Scotland out of this toxic Union at the earliest opportunity to rid our country of weapons of mass destruction and to avoid seeing any more of our service personnel sacrificed in the causes of prime ministers and their governments in London.
Ni Holmes
St Andrews
I CONGRATULATE Elizabeth Scott for having recognised the important issue of the as-yet-undeveloped but very abundant sources of renewable energy which Scotland has available (Letters, Jan 24). I would also draw attention to the fact that the recent ScotWind deal did not include any sites on the west coast of Scotland. It did not mention tidal and wave energy resources (ScotTide? ScotWave?), or the various ways in which excess electrical power can be stored.
I noted also in the same edition James Duncan’s letter about nuclear fusion. I can remember when I first heard about that technology. It was in 1956. I was also told that it would be up and running in 10 years. Since then I have heard the same prediction in every one of the 66 years which have passed since that date. I also point out that if such a plant was to be constructed it would no doubt produce a significant proportion of our generated power. Safe? I can imagine that it would attract the attention of terrorists who would be hoping to turn it into a hydrogen bomb. Also, if that plant were to have some “down-time” (perhaps for less dramatic reasons) we would lose that proportion of our power for a considerable time.
The world is currently facing serious international problems. It is perhaps timely that our country should put itself in a position (as soon as possible) to rescue Europe, and particularly Germany, from an embarrassing overdependence on Russian gas supplies.
Hugh Noble
Appin
IN response to Brian Lawson’s response (Jan 24) to my response to his original letter, I did not pay as high a figure as £12,000, it was nearer £7000. He says: “Even if – and it’s a very big if – the monthly bills are lower.” The bills are much lower; I would calculate about half of what I would be paying had I not changed. On affordability, Home Energy Scotland offers interest-free loans over long periods and the Renewable Heating Incentive further helps. Had I put my savings into a bank savings account, the interest would have been lower than inflation. Making the investment now will better prepare individuals against future energy price rises.
READ MORE: ScotWind opposition just fuels the ‘too poor’ anti-indy argument
Payback time has not outstripped the lifespan of the installations The original solar panel put in place in Britain was removed in 2011 after 50 years in use and returned to the factory where it was found to be still producing at 73% of original efficiency. Modern panels are probably better. Heat pumps are good for 20-plus years. Gas boilers are reckoned to last 10 to 20. During the spring and autumn the solar panels often produce enough electricity to run the house including the heat pump. As I write this my panels are producing 1070 watts and the house is using 515 watts.
At no point did I advocate making constituents install any technology, and as for transforming old tenements, better minds than mine can fathom out small-scale community projects.
Scotland would not be the first country to nationalise its energy capacity. In view of what is happening with energy prices, many Scots may well think it a good idea. In my letter I may not have made my main point clearly enough: we can all make some contribution to the environment, no matter how small. To quote Mr Tesco, “every little helps”.
M Ross
Aviemore
IF, as suggested in The National, the heraldic Unicorn of Scotland is given prominence on “the flag of Scotland”, it is surely essential that it loses the crown collar and chain which it is often portrayed as wearing round its neck! After all, the King James VI Authorised Bible (Job 39:10) asks “Canst thou bind the unicorn?”
Douglas Hunter
Ancrum, Roxburghshire
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel