ARE strikes on Russian targets a risk too far? Iain R Thomson raised this question in Monday’s National.
First, it must be noted that the Russians are under no constraint and are daily attacking deep within Ukraine, killing civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure with an impunity that is criminal.
It would be disingenuous to suggest that Putin would not seek to escalate the threat and perhaps act on this, but what is Russian territory? I would suggest that the 2014 borders be honoured in this regard, and any Russian target within occupied territory is fair game. However, to defeat an enemy like Russia, which hides its resources in a vast hinterland, requires strategic thinking and resolute tactical responses.
READ MORE: Protest against Scottish firm 'helping Russia finance Ukraine war'
I would suggest that to attack roads, railways and especially bridges within artillery range of Ukrainian territory would be a significant way to starve the front line of ammunition and food, which are essential to the army in the field. The specific targeting of air bases and communication infrastructure is also essential, and that may require a deeper penetration of Russian territory. The targeting of civilians or civilian infrastructure would be counter-productive as this tends to strengthen the resolve of the population to support retaliation, but factories and depots directly supporting the war effort should be considered as legitimate targets.
The supply of weapons with such caveats as range limitation is neither morally nor practically useful to Ukraine, the very existence of which is in jeopardy.
David Neilson
Dumfries
RECENT reports of shops being unable to take card payments due to a worldwide IT outage highlight the vital importance of maintaining cash as a reliable payment method within our communities. As customers across the country face issues with card payments, with many businesses having to resort to “cash only” transactions, the role of cash in our daily lives has never been clearer.
Cash provides a dependable alternative when electronic systems fail. It ensures that transactions can continue smoothly, allowing businesses to operate and customers to make necessary purchases without interruption.
READ MORE: Shona Craven: Why the CrowdStrike crash was a warning we must heed
In times of technological glitches or cybersecurity threats, cash remains a steadfast and secure method of payment.
Moreover, cash plays a crucial role in supporting local economies. Small businesses, in particular, benefit from cash transactions as they often avoid the transaction fees associated with card payments. This helps to keep costs down and supports the financial health of our local shops and services.
Using cash also promotes inclusivity. Not everyone has access to digital banking or is comfortable using electronic payment methods. Cash ensures that all members of our community, regardless of their access to technology, can participate fully in the economy.
READ MORE: Edinburgh Airport IT outage leaves GB News host Neil Oliver stranded
Furthermore, cash transactions provide a level of privacy and security that digital payments cannot always guarantee. They help individuals manage their spending more effectively, promoting financial discipline and awareness.
In light of these points, it is essential to recognise and preserve the value of cash in our communities. We encourage residents and businesses alike to continue using cash alongside digital methods to ensure resilience, support local economies, and promote inclusivity.
Let’s work together to keep cash a viable and active part of our financial landscape. It is not just a matter of convenience; it is a matter of ensuring the stability and inclusivity of our economy.
Cllr Alastair Redman (Kintyre and the Islands ward)
Isle of Islay
HOW often do you hear Scottish voices broadcasting their location as “up here”? It is as if they are not quite where they should be. Strange to describe your location as not being “here”, where you are. Is this another illustration of how we see Scotland; a northern locus away from the perfect position which happens to be down there?
Yet another cringy Scottish attitude to our place in the world.
I was “up here” in Scotland the other week gazing at the vista from the summit of Ben Lomond and not from ground level. We had a chance in 2014 to show where we are, but chose to stay “up here”. Here, in Caithness, I send my regards to the Dear Green Place, which, from my perspective, is down there.
Peter Barjonas
Caithness
I AGREE with Christine Smith from Troon about the negativity in some of the content in The National. I see it especially in the letters pages. While there are many good contributors such as Ivor Telfer, Stan Grodynski and Catriona Clark, there are others such as John Baird from Largs or Brian Lawson of Paisley who might as well be writing from a desk at the Telegraph or the BBC. Why are they doing the Unionists’ job? Why not write about the achievements of the SNP, of which there are many, or of the benefits independence could bring, or the anti-independence propaganda in the media?
I’m wondering about these Unionist lines being continually being repeated in these pages.
Jack Bell
Glasgow
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