Let Scotland do what its residents want. Security would be no problem, some sort of well-named alliance could be formed, like the Celtic Alliance by the regional four - England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales. The present-day Union-Jack would cease, but the four independent flags of each would fly! And money woes? Not in Scotland! There's nary a group of people as thrifty as the Scots.

Yes, because you would have a lot less money to play with.

"Scottish Independence Would Damage UK Influence, Says William Hague"

I wish I was as clever as Willy.

Yes we keep our nuclear subs in Scotland, but I would have thought that William Hague is more of a threat to national security than Scotland being independent. Jersey has it's own parliament, but they are not in the EU, so there is room for all sorts of arrangements.

It would be a shame if we were to wake up with a hangover to discover that we don't have what the Nats have promised us.

Scotland has issues on Oil reserves. OK let them take all they can manage becuase they'll need it in the long run.
new alliances and political union will be need to be made with Eurpoean counterparts and eventually swallowed up into the belly of the EU.
UNdemocratically elected quangoes will be dictating everything you do the only buffer Scotland has had so far is the UK. This will cease and Scotland will be left naked to the political monster of Europe.
Scotland can max their devolution without the full divorce.I think the Divorce settlement & immediate quick gain riches is all that the current Scottish nationalists can peddle. What happens in 25-30 years when all the oil has gone?
England,Wales have 5 trillion tonnes of mineable Coal 200+ years underground which can be used in exactly the same way as OIL. England & Wales & Northern Ireland have vast underground self replenishing Aquafers which can supply all water needs (if theyre managed properly) the list can go on. The divorce isn't one way and if Scotland thinks it can get one up on the English then theyre sadly mistaken. Yes maybe in the short term,Scotland will have the upper hand and yes, maybe England will rue the day we let Scotland go.This reactive deppression from seperation will only be temporary and when the reality bites after the nationalists have sobered up from their demented fervour for Independance at all costs,then they may well be the ones to rue the day.

Scotsmen are notoriously cost conscious, so, instead of gobbing off about things that cannot be quantified why don't you tell us how much indepence is going to cost us?

Being on the top table at the UN s only a prestigious position we don’t have to be there. Other countries cope like Denmark and Finland that have a similar population to Scotland.

I can see in the future though, that Europe will have one head at the top table and France and the UK will have to give way to it.

Continuing that argument leads to the logical conclusion that the United Kingdom should become the 51st state of the USA.

Utter Tosh - it is precisely BECAUSE the UK behaves like a bully around the world that it has become a target for terrorists. It is unlikely that any of the successor states of the UK would have a permanent seat on the UN security council, and that is what concerns the imperialist toffs running the country.

Well, since we have to pay our percentage of the bills, we also have to gain a percentage of embassies. As for security, is he really suggesting that the rUK can't defend itself without Scotland? We know that Scottish soldiers have been cannon fodder for years, but to hear a Westminster politician admit it? Wow!

As for permanent membership, as the UK is the permanent member, will the rUK succeed to the seat or will Scotland? Will anybody?

Religion wars.