Strangely anxious Angus Robertson ‘does a Sarah Palin’

Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska and  Republican John McCain’s running mate in the 2008 American Presidential election won by Barack Obama, became the joke of the media for saying, in response to questions on her knowledge of foreign affairs: ‘I can see Russia from my back yard’.

Now the SNP’s Defence Spokesperson, Angus Robertson, in an unusually nervous, almost paranoid state – given his normal bullishness – has followed the Palin suit.

Mr Robertson claims that he too can see the threat of Russian invaders to Scotland ‘with my naked eye’ – not from Alaska but from Moray.

This came during a parliamentary debate at Westminster yesterday, in Mr Robertson’s  extraordinary call for an urgent strengthening of the coastal defence forces of his constituency.

He conjured images of a retreating ice-sheet leaving Russian aircraft carriers ‘perched’ [hardly a maritime metaphor] off the Scottish coast’.

In his vulnerability, he spoke of the imperative of having ‘the military capability’ to deal with what he described as the ‘increasing regularity’ of the appearance of these Russian aircraft carriers on their birdlike perches in the North Sea.

He didn’t quite go so far as to endorse the need for the renewal of Trident but with the poor man in such a state of heightened anxiety, that reversal cannot be too distant.

Perhaps the threat that is most deranging the present leader of the SNP’s MP group in the House of Commons is the image of the SNP’s own battle cruiser, Alex Salmond MSP, perched on a rostrum in Gordon on 8th May, accepting his election to Westminster?

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·


Related Articles & Comments

  • Maybe not completely paranoid – not so long ago some Russian warships ‘took shelter’ rather unexpectedly (apparently) off the Moray coast, and then there’s the small matter of the unsolved and seemingly professional killing of a resident of Nairn by an assassin who came from the sea just a few years ago.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4

    Robert Wakeham April 29, 2015 3:17 pm Reply
    • Tell us more about the Nairn resident? We’re new to that one.
      There’s a useful note in relation to the west’s manipulated fears of Russia.
      ‘Russian bears’ make screaming headlines when they tease us [in response to our own provocations with ‘the largest ever Joint Warrior’ exercise] by flying close to but not into our airspace.
      These are the Tupolev TU-95 bombers, the only propeller-driven strategic bomber still in operation and first flown in 1952.
      They were the signature Russian aircraft of the Cold War years.
      Our Cold War icon was the delta-winged turbojet bomber, the Avro Vulcan, first flown in 1956.
      We grounded the Vulcan in 1984.
      Thirty years later, the Russians are still flying the even earlier TU-95s [sometimes called the TU-20s] – the ‘Bears’.
      Hardly a frontline threat.
      Imagine the job of trying to hold Russia together. Mindblowing. It is not in the interests of world stability that the Russian Federation fails.
      The EU has meddled indefensibly in silly power games, trying to make Russia feel more vulnerable by seducing Ukraine into joining the Baltic States as EU members. This is simply light-fingered destabilisation.
      We went to war in 1982 to allow British people in the Falklands to retain their citizenship; and for us to retain ownership of the territory for our own strategic reasons. Russia did the same, for the same reasons, in the Crimea last year.
      In both cases the national affiliates asked for help.
      Both we and Russia were portrayed as aggressors in some quarters.
      In each case, from other perspectives, this was not an unreasonable representation.
      Things always look different from the other side of the fence – but America is making fools of us in its scaremongering on Russia.
      In our joint interests, we need to make a friend of Russia and we need to try to understand the world as seen from Russia. It seems more predator than prey.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3

      newsroom April 29, 2015 6:13 pm Reply
      • Are you referring to the poor chap who was shot dead on his doorstep? He was a bank manager I think. I’ve never read anything that suggested such an outlandish idea as him being assassinated by russian frogmen from a submarine; it sounds a bit too much like a plot from one of Freddy Forsyth’s poorer novels.

        Robertson is dead right even if he had a media meltdown; we need to be able to protect ourselves and fulfill our NATO obligations. Volodya is one of our biggest potential foes and inactivity in response to his activities in Chechnya, Georgia and Transnistria and meddling interference and bumbling in response to the Ukraine war have encouraged the Russian Bear to get ambitious.

        The Tu95 is a maritime patrol aircraft; their equivalent to Nimrod, it’s a similar age of original design, it fits the bill and there’s life left in them. Long range maritime patrol needs range and carrying capacity, the age is not significant.

        Russia did the same, for the same reasons, in the Crimea last year.
        In both cases the national affiliates asked for help.
        Both we and Russia were portrayed as aggressors in some quarters.
        In each case, from other perspectives, this was not an unreasonable representation.
        Things always look different from the other side of the fence – but America is making fools of us in its scaremongering on Russia.

        There’s a small problem there; Crimea didn’t belong to them and they signed an agreement 20 years ago to guarantee Ukraine’s territorial integrity. A plebiscite held at a few days notice with ‘little green men’ and armed militia roaming the streets beating up people they didn’t like, disappearing others and confiscating private property, and no UN or OSCE supervision meant the ballot wasn’t worth the paper the boxes were stuffed with. However much Volodya was irked by the alleged US involvement in encouraging Yanukovych to spend more time with his family, invading and annexing sovereign territory of a neighbour state was both intemperate and a gross act of war.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

        db April 29, 2015 6:36 pm Reply
        • Wasn’t suggesting ‘Russian frogmen’, but there was speculation at the time, ten years ago, that the murderer might have arrived by boat before crossing the links to the house – but council workers later found the gun in a drain half a mile away, and I don’t know if the location supported that theory or not.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

          Robert Wakeham April 30, 2015 1:13 am Reply
      • I never believed that the leaders of the Soviet Union thought that they could take over Western Europe, let alone the world, though doubtless they were interested in recruiting useful idiots and leaning on fences to see if they might shift a few feet. What they did want was a deep buffer zone around their borders and I expect that Putin’s priorities are the same. This does not mean that the pushing should not be resisted … the big question is how, and steady deep resistance is more likely to be effective than big threats which just consolidate Russian fears. It would also help if London, and the City, was not so welcoming to Russian kleptocrats.
        On Mr Robertson’s fears … well … it does seem that we have run down our maritime surveillance abilities to a worrying level, and it could be argued that this is at least in part due to spending on “standing-tall” military prestige projects.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

        Arthur Blue April 30, 2015 9:47 am Reply
  • She’s obsessed.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 9

    Simon April 29, 2015 3:21 pm Reply
  • Perhaps he should explain to his colleagues what “Deterrent” means!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5

    RabC April 29, 2015 3:43 pm Reply
  • Slow news day?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7

    Grassy Knoll April 29, 2015 4:14 pm Reply
  • I can see the sky from my window Newsie.

    What’s the vulnerability in this. Attack from Mars perchance?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

    willie April 29, 2015 5:02 pm Reply
  • This will be the same Angus Robertson who, on the Daily Politics debate on Defence, claims the real threat was ‘from the North’. Once Andrew Neil got him to agree it wasn’t Iceland, Greenland, Denmark or Canada, he indirectly agreed that the threat was from Russia.

    At least this incompetent idiot accepts Russia are a threat to global security – but now he’s picking and choosing what that threat will look like!!

    He’s every bit as bad as Stuart Hosie…or any member of the SNP in fact. They are a talking disaster on defence if you actually taake time to listen to them.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 9

    Jamie Black April 29, 2015 5:18 pm Reply
    • incompetent idiot… stop looking in the mirror.

      A terrorist on a boat or aircraft heads for the oil rigs, or nuclear installation etc. What will stop them nuclear weapons or conventional aircraft, radar, intelligence, missiles, soldiers, sailors or air crew? Answer. Not the first one

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10

      No Cheese Here April 29, 2015 5:25 pm Reply
      • You can’t just pick and choose what threats you defend yourself against. Plonker.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7

        Jamie Black April 29, 2015 5:48 pm Reply
  • Didn’t we have a nuclear deterrent when Argentina invaded the Falklands? Maybe the Argys weren’t aware of our capability or maybe, just maybe they knew only too well that the UK possess them knowing fine well we will NEVER use them and are nothing but posturing symbols.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8

    JnrTick April 29, 2015 5:20 pm Reply
    • You really are clueless jnrTick, but do keep it up. A nuclear deterrent is to neutralise that threat of a nuclear attack by other countries. Again, you, the SNP and Mr Robertson really should do yourself a favour and start understanding the meaning of the word ‘deterrent’. Or not and give us all a laugh.

      I’m away to watch mr Robertson make a fool of himself one more time…

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7

      Jamie Black April 29, 2015 5:47 pm Reply
  • Have a look here – he started making a fool of himself at 14mins (‘one can see with the naked eye Russian aircraft carriers’ and then at 35mins onwards. Total buffoon!

    Have a look for a laugh! At 14mins he sys we need to deal with the Russians but at 35mins says there is no justification for Trident. A normal person couldn’t make it up – Angus Robertson could.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05sjgtg/daily-politics-2015-election-debates-defence-and-security

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6

    Jamie Black April 29, 2015 5:40 pm Reply
    • Really was hilarious! Andrew Neil couldn’t believe what he was hearing from Robertson.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5

      Gus MacKay April 29, 2015 6:29 pm Reply
      • Gus, I have just viewed this and Angus Robertson, along with the Green representative woman both came across as total arseholes. God help us if Robertson has anything to do with Defence.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

        Sceptic1 April 29, 2015 10:29 pm Reply
        • God help us if Robertson has anything to do with anything.
          Is it any wonder they hope Salmond wins Gordon, then he will take over the Snp group at Westminster.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5

          Gus MacKay April 29, 2015 11:57 pm Reply
  • Plonker idiot buffoon incompetent –take it as you give it.

    Why don’t we shoot or sink them down, peskie Russians. how dare they!

    We clean living westerners don’t spy & don’t test the Russian defences, do we?

    Noted you couldn’t answer my point over conventional weapons.

    Not surprised.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8

    No Cheese Here April 29, 2015 6:20 pm Reply
  • Isn’t the difference here that Robertson wasn’t trying to claim that his proximity to the alleged threat gave him sufficient insight to be in charge of the foreign policy and commander of the armed forces of the most powerful nation on the planet?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6

    Arethosemyfeet April 29, 2015 6:23 pm Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *