lol, your contribution to this thread is outstanding +1...Mogura wrote:
i loved the movie Braveheart, with Mel Gibson
Poll
Should Scotland become an independent republic?
| Freeeeeeeeeeedddddoooooommmm!! | 54% | 54% - 31 | ||||
| No | 31% | 31% - 18 | ||||
| It depends (explain..) | 14% | 14% - 8 | ||||
| Total: 57 | ||||||
*sigh*RicardoBlanco wrote:
*sigh*aardfrith wrote:
Should Scotland become an independent republic?
I have two ways of looking at this - from an English perspective and from a reasonable person's view.
English: Hell no. We need their oil and gas. Maybe let them go in 20 years time, when it runs out.
Reasonable person: If they want out and vote for it, we have to let them go. We can't do what Russia did with Chechnya, can we? They had natural resources and that's the only reason Russia didn't want them to gain independence.
It's not your oil. It's under the jurisdiction of the UK Government, under which you fall. Scotland is also an industrial desert so fuck knows what, or where, exactly you'd be getting all your money from, I'm guessing Tourism.
It's only our oil because it's closest to our land. Specifically, that would be Scottish land so if Scotland became independent, it would fall to them, as would everything else in Scottish territory.
If Scotland wants independence, I see no legal way to stop them. Its a group of 5000000 people for fucks sake! They are the only ones who know what is best for them, period.
The empire is no more.
The empire is no more.
Last edited by SpaceApollyon (2006-12-14 05:59:07)
I know, but as it stands NOW it is our oil, it comes under our jurisdiction. Furthemore, because England and Scotland have different legal systems there's no saying they'd be given the oil fields as part of any 'severance package' anyway.aardfrith wrote:
*sigh*
It's only our oil because it's closest to our land. Specifically, that would be Scottish land so if Scotland became independent, it would fall to them, as would everything else in Scottish territory.
"You're damn right too - you would have had to massacre every last one of us because if you didn't there'd still be men out there ready to shoot the nearest English soldier in the back of the head." There...
Palestine didn't win its freedom against the British, it was granted to the British by the UN and was given back to the UN by the British.
The problems in India were of their own making. They chose to protest which resulted in the only thing holding together the different religious groups, they then chose to split into different countries.
I think you have a problem with responsablity cameron, if the British don't control a country and that country makes decisions its their fault and not the British.
Palestine didn't win its freedom against the British, it was granted to the British by the UN and was given back to the UN by the British.
The problems in India were of their own making. They chose to protest which resulted in the only thing holding together the different religious groups, they then chose to split into different countries.
I think you have a problem with responsablity cameron, if the British don't control a country and that country makes decisions its their fault and not the British.
Just to make this clear Cameron, I dont want any kind of Empire, in the modern day and age it is irrelivent as it will just drain a countries resources and not realy reap any kind of trade benefits as there is no where in the world that is the only supplier of a staple good. It was good for the British Empire hundreds of years ago and when it came that it wasn't we dropped the people that wanted their freedom so badly and wanted the Brits out of thier country on their ass's.
On Point One: I'm stating a fact. Is that so hard to comprehend? They had been doing likewise for hundreds of years, why would they stop? If Hitler won the battle of Britain, would you resist? If yes then would you regard yourself as an extremist? If no then you're like no Brit I've ever met - you'd be bereft of any form of patriotism.Vilham wrote:
"You're damn right too - you would have had to massacre every last one of us because if you didn't there'd still be men out there ready to shoot the nearest English soldier in the back of the head." There...
Palestine didn't win its freedom against the British, it was granted to the British by the UN and was given back to the UN by the British.
The problems in India were of their own making. They chose to protest which resulted in the only thing holding together the different religious groups, they then chose to split into different countries.
I think you have a problem with responsablity cameron, if the British don't control a country and that country makes decisions its their fault and not the British.
Point Two: Britain pulled out of Palestine because from 1936 right throught to 1948 they had less and less control of the chaotic situation, in the end they were simply confined to barracks. All they needed was an excuse to hightail it. Their power and influence saw that everything worked out fine in the end for the residents of the region though...
Point Three: Yes it's as much their fault but if the Brits were as powerful and influential as you would have us believe then they would have been able to enforce some kind of peaceful break-up. Turns out they weren't.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-12-14 06:14:32)
OK Vilham. And by the way. I quite like England and their long history. It's an interesting place to visit. I'm not some extremist Brit-hater here. I'm an Irish Republican who takes pride in his country just like you're a proud Brit. We're bound to have disagreements over historical issues.Vilham wrote:
Just to make this clear Cameron, I dont want any kind of Empire, in the modern day and age it is irrelivent as it will just drain a countries resources and not realy reap any kind of trade benefits as there is no where in the world that is the only supplier of a staple good. It was good for the British Empire hundreds of years ago and when it came that it wasn't we dropped the people that wanted their freedom so badly and wanted the Brits out of thier country on their ass's.
Turns out actually that the Indians just wanted us out. They didnt think ahead, I dont believe that is a British problem.
As to point 1. omg.... how stupid can you get? something happening in my parents lifetime is different from something happening over 20 generations ago, as i have pointed out about 10 times now. If a race can hold a grudge against the English that long its bordering on just becoming racist towards the British as there is no real affecting within your own life and is only based on what others have said or done.
As to point 1. omg.... how stupid can you get? something happening in my parents lifetime is different from something happening over 20 generations ago, as i have pointed out about 10 times now. If a race can hold a grudge against the English that long its bordering on just becoming racist towards the British as there is no real affecting within your own life and is only based on what others have said or done.
Vilham: my grandparents were alive under British rule of Ireland. My great grandmother who lived to 98 remembered being harassed by the Black & Tans. And for me time does not dilute principles anyway. Principles are eternal. And no I don't bear a grudge against British people - I bear a grudge against the government/monarchy of said country having ruled my country and occupied it by force.Vilham wrote:
Turns out actually that the Indians just wanted us out. They didnt think ahead, I dont believe that is a British problem.
As to point 1. omg.... how stupid can you get? something happening in my parents lifetime is different from something happening over 20 generations ago, as i have pointed out about 10 times now. If a race can hold a grudge against the English that long its bordering on just becoming racist towards the British as there is no real affecting within your own life and is only based on what others have said or done.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-12-14 07:31:02)
And yet there sure hasnt been fighitng for the past 850 years solid which means someone started problems. Wait a second who could that be? Could it have been the Irish? O yeah now i remember. I believe you started attacking and killing people because you werent happy. If the rest of the world acted like that we would live in anarchy.
Vilham there was sporadic fighting for the entire 850 year period. Wtf are you on about? We were never happy. Ever heard of the penal laws? The outlawing of Catholics owning property, being educated, having savings, speaking the Irish language, holding public office or entering the legal profession? Your lack of knowledge here astounds me.Vilham wrote:
And yet there sure hasnt been fighitng for the past 850 years solid which means someone started problems. Wait a second who could that be? Could it have been the Irish? O yeah now i remember. I believe you started attacking and killing people because you werent happy. If the rest of the world acted like that we would live in anarchy.
Why do you appear to want to justify your occupation/invasion of a foreign country so much?
Wikipedia wrote:
Among the discriminations now faced by victims of the Penal Laws were:
Exclusion of Catholics from most public offices (since 1607), Presbyterians were also barred from public office from 1707.
Ban on intermarriage with Protestants
Presbyterian marriages were not legally recognised by the state
Catholics barred from holding firearms or serving in the armed forces (rescinded by Militia Act of 1793)
Exclusion from membership in either the Parliament of Ireland or the Parliament of Great Britain from 1652, rescinded 1688, reinstated 1691;
Disenfranchising Act 1728, exclusion from voting;
Exclusion from the legal professions and judiciary;
Education Act 1695 - ban on foreign education;
On a death by a Catholic, a legatee could benefit by conversion to the Church of Ireland;
Popery Act- Catholic inheritances of land were to be equally subdivided between all an owner's sons.
Ban on converting from Protestantism to Roman Catholicism
Ban on Catholics buying land under a lease of more than 31 years
Ban on custody of orphans being granted to Catholics
Ban on Catholics inheriting Protestant land
Prohibition on Catholics owning a horse valued at over £5 (in order to keep horses suitable for military activity out of the majority's hands)
Roman Catholic lay priests had to register to preach under the Registration Act 1704, but seminary priests and Bishops were not able to do so.
When allowed, Catholic churches were to be built from wood, not stone, and away from main roads.
No person of the popish religion shall publicly or in private houses teach school, or instruct youth in learning within this realm.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-12-14 06:26:14)
I think England should own the whole of Ireland.
Last edited by mr.degman (2006-12-14 06:31:42)
... in that case, there are still quite a few Scottish people you could make yourself acquainted with.Vilham wrote:
Ive never heard a single scottish person wanting independance. I know a lot of them.
Shall I start introducing?
How about a Knight Bachelor of the British honours system: Sir Thomas Sean Connery.
I have no relations to the Scottish people and even I know that they have a strong independence movement in Scotland.
And i also think sweden or russia still should own finland
And would you mind sharing some reasoning behind your fantasy? Is Norway also a part of Sweden in your dreams?mr.degman wrote:
And i also think sweden or russia still should own finland
Last edited by SpaceApollyon (2006-12-14 07:00:13)
If Scotland wsa to return to the pre 1707 status as an Independant nation,it would do so after a vote in next May's Parliamentary elections,where it looks as though the SNP might form a government.The Labour hegemony isnt doing so well at present,cant think why?RicardoBlanco wrote:
I know, but as it stands NOW it is our oil, it comes under our jurisdiction. Furthemore, because England and Scotland have different legal systems there's no saying they'd be given the oil fields as part of any 'severance package' anyway.aardfrith wrote:
*sigh*
It's only our oil because it's closest to our land. Specifically, that would be Scottish land so if Scotland became independent, it would fall to them, as would everything else in Scottish territory.
Independance would be the settled will of the Scottish Electorate.
It is not something that we would "be given", as its not anyones to give.
As a sovereign nation International Law would indicate that the majority of the Oil Fields currently in production in the UK sector would by definition be "Scottish".
This is a given.
Similarly the financial sector"the square mile" in London and all taxes accruing to the exchequer would be "English".
Below please find a recent news item on Oil and Westminsters/Whitehalls shady dealings.
Independence cover-up exposedsnp - 2006-01-30
Whitehall knew in the 1970s that Scots could have been nearly one-third better-off than the English within a few years of splitting from the UK, although the knowledge was kept from the public.
The 1970s documents warned that if devolution increased calls for Independence, the loss of oil income might leave the UK virtually bankrupt.
The documents are highlighted in the BBC Radio Four series Document.
Prominent Scottish National Party supporter Sir Sean Connery has called for an inquiry into the affair.
Sir Sean suggested the result of the vote could have been different if Scots had known the full truth about their oil reserves.
"This is genuine evidence of what I consider collusion by people who are not in the position to make that decision.
"The depth of it, the cynicism of it, is appalling. There should be a genuine inquiry and it should be exposed."
The fear that devolution could lead to Independence even led to the Labour government of the day holding a devolution summit, at which the chancellor, Denis Healey, headed an attempted revolt in trying to put the brakes on Scottish home rule plans.
A bleak Treasury assessment warned that just the perception that Scotland could be about to move from devolution to independence and take control of oil revenues would plunge the UK into economic crisis.
The prospects for the economy of the rest of the UK were described as "grim" while those for Scotland were so strong that officials advised ministers they should start to "think the unthinkable".
At the meeting on June 3, 1975, the chancellor, now Lord Healey, was backed by Roy Jenkins, then home secretary, and Tony Crosland, the environment secretary, but all they won from cabinet was a block on any new public commitments on devolution.
A senior Whitehall civil servant wrote: "Progress towards devolution should be delayed for as long as possible, consistent with honouring the government's commitment to move down the devolution route and containing the SNP lobby in parliament."
Another official warned in 1975 of the impact on the rest of Britain's economy if Scotland moved to independence and took control of North Sea oil.
He said: "The Scots have really got us over a barrel here. The prospects for a separate English, Welsh and Ulster economy on the same assumption must look pretty grim."
A referendum on devolution was eventually called in 1979.
Kenny MacAskill, the SNP MSP, said of the revelations:
"We've been robbed of billions. Every Scottish man, woman and child should be considerably better-off and could have been since the 1970s. Gordon Brown [the chancellor] wants us to rally to the Union flag, but this 25-30% gap is the price for being British.
"The bad news is that each of us is 25-30% poorer. The good news is that we've still got 30 to 40 years of oil and we can't allow the sins of the past 30 years to carry on."
on the question above , yes
Depends.
As the majority of the British Cabinet is Scottish, would that mean that they would become excluded from the what will be then English Parliament?
If this is the case, then I support the idea. Otherwise, I want to be PM for Scotland. (I'm English)
As the majority of the British Cabinet is Scottish, would that mean that they would become excluded from the what will be then English Parliament?
If this is the case, then I support the idea. Otherwise, I want to be PM for Scotland. (I'm English)
The West Lothian question ! - wondered how long it would take
Cue Tam Dalziel, wonder if he browses these forums ?
Cue Tam Dalziel, wonder if he browses these forums ?
Hmm good point we could pay you to keep them,or send them to some far of place to sort out a spot of local difficulty.Penetrator_01 wrote:
Depends.
As the majority of the British Cabinet is Scottish, would that mean that they would become excluded from the what will be then English Parliament?
If this is the case, then I support the idea. Otherwise, I want to be PM for Scotland. (I'm English)
LOL cam you make me laugh so much. Whenever anyone thinks of ireland they think potato famine, nothing good. Your country is like the book on italian war heroesCameronPoe wrote:
And that's where you're wrong. Try reading the Economist magazine or other financial/political publications or visiting the fucking place and you'll see that we are a lot better off. The only place the UK beats us is on infrastructure. But then again the Irish navvy built your infrastructure for you.Vilham wrote:
The fact is your country is still 10x poorer than the UK. Thus doesnt realy have the wealth to properly invest in anything.CameronPoe wrote:
You'll be laughing on the other side of your face when you have to pay to import power from them! Celts are made of sterner stuff than you give them credit for. When we drove ye out noone would have expected that we'd grow to become one of the best performing economies in Europe, with the highest quality of life and lowest unemployment rate in the EU.
Yes, if they have complete control.
Then I can move there to get away from an idiotic government.
Then I can move there to get away from an idiotic government.
I can't help it if some people are ignorant and stupid. You have a right to be stupid and ignorant if you want. I'm not going to deny you your right to suffer from a lack of intelligence and lack of general knowledge. I don't really have that much time for small minded people who know little or nothing about the world outside their home nation. You're the kind of person who thinks everyone in France eats frogs legs, everyone in Germany wears lederhosen and everyone in the middle east wears suicide bomb belts. You really need to grow up.James-M-II wrote:
LOL cam you make me laugh so much. Whenever anyone thinks of ireland they think potato famine, nothing good. Your country is like the book on italian war heroes
James-M-II wrote:
whats the most exciting thing in irish history?! a potato famine?