As I experience the joy of a countryside walk in refreshing, sunny March weather, my mind wanders to the current political and military world turmoil.
President Trump has embarked on a course of action that lacks the strategic planning or intelligence to foresee its eventual outcome.
Anxiously I ponder, why wouldn't Russia and China covertly provide Iran with an endless supply of drones to wreak economic havoc upon the rest of the world’s energy supply?
Why not recruit Iran as a proxy to effect their long term strategy of world domination? Democracy, as we have known it, is already fracturing, evidenced by the emergence of splinter parties with their radical, divisive manifestos, causing unrest in our communities.
How will it all end? Will our democracies have the strength to survive outrages spilling onto our streets due to economic hardships, while communities rebel against ethnic diversity and tolerance?
Meanwhile, our armed forces try to cope with global wars.
Again, I see this playing to the strengths of totalitarian regimes who forcefully suppress domestic protests while, unhindered, pursue their military objectives.
Heaven forfend that Russia takes advantage, engulfs Europe, and seals a military and economic alliance with China, to which even the USA would have to bend the knee… No!
I must appreciate that my wife doesn't want me to talk about this anymore, and let faith and sunshine overwhelm my doomsday scenario.
Jon Cossar, Edinburgh.
More letters...
Failing UK Government has gone into ‘England-only’ mode
The treatment of trans people is the way I was treated as a gay teenager
Iran war is Pythonesque
I watched on TV as US Secretary of Defence, Pete Hegseth, espoused propaganda, describing how the US and Israel have single-handedly destroyed Iran’s air force, navy, officials, rulers, and weapons-making capability.
Yet the war continues.
This had me wondering, perhaps Mr Hegseth has never watched the Black Knight scene from the film Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
When the knight’s arms are chopped off with a sword, he continues to kick his adversary. When he loses his legs, he bites his enemy.
But he never surrenders.
This might seem a flippant analogy in the light of thousands killed; countries dragged unwillingly into what could be a Third World War; oil prices through the roof; and the world’s economy forced to its knees.
However, the satirical Python sketch sums up Iran perfectly. “Tis but a scratch, a flesh wound,” says the Black Knight, refusing to give up.
Iran may be ruled by those with an evil ideology. But, as has been said before, you cannot bomb an ideology out of existence.
Bombing only succeeds in fuelling the fire.
Linda FitzGerald, Perthshire.
Ferry fiasco continues
Those of us of a certain era remember Para Handy, skipper of the Vital Spark, the steam boat from a series of stories by Neil Munro, first published in 1905.
Para Handy was proud of his puffer, declaring it “the smertest boat in the coastin' tred”. The stories were humorous and involved chaotic events; plans never quite turn out as imagined.
Unfortunately, it appears the SNP watched the TV series based on the books, and took it as aspiration rather than fiction.
The two ferries commissioned by the SNP to be built at the Ferguson Marine shipyard have been a disaster from day one.
There were warnings that there were too many risks. The SNP carried on regardless.
Delivered late and costing five times the original contract price so far, we now learn that the propellor design was not tested in a water tank, but only using a computer model (Herald Letters, March 13).
Due to excessive vibration, the propellors on the Glen Sannox, which only came into service at the end of 2025, will have to be replaced.
As will those on the Glen Rosa, which is still not complete. This work is required to prevent the hull cracking again. Repairs will likely cost the taxpayer up to £3.2 million.
When will this sorry saga end?
What will the final cost be for two ferries?
Neil Munro’s stories about the Vital Spark and Para Handy were far-fetched. Unfortunately the SNP’s incompetence to manage a project is Scotland’s reality.
Jane Lax, Aberlour.
Independence: only Scotland decides
Robert IG Scott challenges nationalists to think again politically, economically and on defence, should Scotland become independent (Herald Letters, March 13).
Mr Scott states that it is not only Scotland that should have a say, regarding Scotland’s future.
He suggests that the rest of the UK should also have a say, which begs the question: why ?
From bitter experience Scotland knows only too well the impact of letting England make decisions on our behalf.
Let me remind Mr Scott that Scotland analysed the country’s economic future, and came to the conclusion that for our economic survival - to boost growth and assist business - we would be better off remaining in the EU.
England, with a population approaching 10 times that of Scotland, chose differently.
Now, to Scotland’s detriment, we are no longer part of the single market, the customs union and, ultimately, the EU.
With global security on heightened alert, an independent Scotland would be doing all it could to re-join the EU.
So, no lessons please, about Scotland deciding its future. It’s ultimately the people of Scotland who will decide this, and we only have to wait till May 7.
Catriona C Clark, Banknock, Falkirk.
Voting: the facts
James Martin (Herald Letters, March 12) will be sadly disappointed if he thinks First Past The Post (FPTP) would give majority winners just by making voting compulsory.
The winner in a FPTP election needs only one vote more than the second-placed candidate, and that is no guarantee of a majority.
Even with a truly majoritarian voting system like the Alternative Vote (AV), where every individual winner is elected with a real majority, one party with the support of only 26% of the voters can take an overall majority of the seats in the Parliament or Council.
All they need is to win a majority of the votes (51%) in a majority (51%) of the seats.
The problem is the single-member constituencies.
David Bruce (Herald Letters, March 13) helpfully draws attention to the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system of proportional representation.
But he is wrong when he says that STV doesn't do away with a system that ranks party loyalty above the needs of the electorate.
Because each winner in an STV-PR election is the personal choice of a constituency of local voters, the elected members are directly accountable to those voters.
If the members put voting 'the party line' above the interests of their local electors, those local electors can vote them out at the next election, often without having to vote against their favoured party.
All the voters need to do is change the order of their preferences.
James Gilmour, Edinburgh.
Order of the boot
Many Holyrood MSPs will be shaking in their boots, sensing their well paid, cosy jobs will end in May, with Reform UK bringing political change to Scotland.
For many years numerous politicians have enjoyed a generous salary, plus expenses, in return for essentially part-time hours.
Meanwhile, the quality and standard of living has dramatically dropped for ordinary Scottish folk.
Dennis Forbes Grattan, Bucksburn, Aberdeen.
Share