British Posters: how do you guys feel about the possibility of Scotland leaving?

[MavsSuperFan]

So there is zero chance you guys militarily force them to stay if they vote for secession right?

[RidonKs]

dude just this past fall thousands protested military strikes against syria. bomb scotland right across a land border? are you ****ing serious?

that was harsh lol no its extremely unlikely = no chance whatsoever

[MavsSuperFan]

dude just this past fall thousands protested military strikes against syria. bomb scotland right across a land border? are you ****ing serious?

that was harsh lol no its extremely unlikely = no chance whatsoever
ya i figured, just seems weird in the american context. If one of our states, lets be honest probably texas, tried to secede, the US military would force it to stay. I have no idea what goes on in the UK

[JohnFreeman]

I don't think England cares to be honest

[Le Shaqtus]

Scotland is full of wienies.

Britons>Scots.

[RidonKs]

ya i figured, just seems weird in the american context. If one of our states, lets be honest probably texas, tried to secede, the US military would force it to stay. I have no idea what goes on in the UK
i was just heard a few brits on the radio the other day saying nobody would give two shits. of course the missing words there are "who matters". there are "people who matter" who obviously have interests in delaying scottish independence and pursuing them with their resources. these "people that matters" live on both sides of the border.

[MavsSuperFan]

I don't think England cares to be honest
Which to me is baffling.

England will lose direct control of a huge swath of land and the natural resources of that land.


Approximately 90% of the United Kingdom's North Sea oil fields are located in Scottish territorial waters. The tax revenue generated from offshore sites are not counted within the nation or region nearest to it, but is instead allocated to the UK Continental Shelf.

If alaska were to try to gain independance tomorrow I would support sending marines there to force them to stay just for control of the energy deposits.

[RidonKs]

If alaska were to try to gain independance tomorrow I would support sending marines there to force them to stay just for control of the energy deposits.
and if referendums showed the vast majority of alaskans preferred joining the english commonwealth as a sovereign entity? and upon marine intervention, they rose up in protest and violent struggle?

then what?

[NumberSix]

Which to me is baffling.

England will lose direct control of a huge swath of land and the natural resources of that land.



If alaska were to try to gain independance tomorrow I would support sending marines there to force them to stay just for control of the energy deposits.
Maybe what you don't understand is that Scotland is not a state. It's a country. The United Kingdom is a union of 4 countries (Wales is a little tricky though) Not states of a single country, although the UK is kind of a country. A country of countries.

[RidonKs]

ya i figured, just seems weird in the american context. If one of our states, lets be honest probably texas, tried to secede, the US military would force it to stay.
yes it would. that's a difference between the two countries worth considering.

also worth considering is how public opinion would compare with institutional action in such a scenario. say texas secedes tomorrow... who says it has a right to self determination and can exit the union under certain conditions? alternatively, who call it tantamount to a betrayal of the mighty national sovereignty.

likely, the truth would reside somewhere in the middle. bear in mind i have plenty of experience with this kind of national dilemma. in your life time, america has not. canada has been dealing with quebec nationalism and threats to secede for decades now. it's been the canadian issue. we've attempted three constitutional overhauls in that time span (only one passed under shady circumstances). quebec separation would be even more catastrophic for my neck of the woods. it would cut the maritimes (nova scotia, new brunswick, pie) aka the least developed part of the country off from the rest of the continent. important stuff.

the closest it came was in the late 70s when an organization called the flq murdered a high ranking quebecois congressman in the culmination of a series of terrorist plots. how did pierre trudeau our prime minister of the time respond to this crisis? he invoked the war measures act and sent in the armed forces and arrested everybody presumed to be affiliated with the crimes being committed. there were 497 people arrested in the days after this decision. 435 have been released.

there you have it. good job pierre.

since then there have been multiple attempts to pass a referendum on "independence" or "sovereignty" or "nationhood" or for some kind of special relationship with the federal canadian government. who the fk knows. the last referendum was in 95 and left the issue with even more haze. independence narrowly lost.

but had independence won, what would have been the right action to take for jean chretian? certainly not to send in the armed forces i wouldn't think.

the same isn't true in the united states for other reasons.

[BasedTom]

scotland isn't going to get bombed no matter what happens lol

but then again, this is the same country where Maggie Thatcher threatened to nuke Buenos Aires over a couple of worthless islands while britain itself was collapsing in every sense of the word

[RidonKs]

Maybe what you don't understand is that Scotland is not a state. It's a country. The United Kingdom is a union of 4 countries (Wales is a little tricky though) Not states of a single country, although the UK is kind of a country. A country of countries.
so that's all to say the definitions of 'state' and 'country' are useless

[Inactive]

Maybe what you don't understand is that Scotland is not a state. It's a country. The United Kingdom is a union of 4 countries (Wales is a little tricky though) Not states of a single country, although the UK is kind of a country. A country of countries.The UK is a single sovereign state. Not a loose confederation of states, or even a federation of states like the U.S.

I don't believe it's composed of separate countries in any legal sense. They're separate countries only in the sense that the people who live in different regions have separate national histories, and maintain ethnic distinctions between each other.

Scotland can secede, while Texas cannot, only because the U.K government is willing to allow it, and the U.S government isn't.


Devolution is the statutory granting of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to government at a subnational level, such as a regional, local, or state level. It is a form of decentralization. Devolved territories have the power to make legislation relevant to the area.

Devolution differs from federalism in that the devolved powers of the subnational authority may be temporary and ultimately reside in central government, thus the state remains, de jure unitary. Legislation creating devolved parliaments or assemblies can be repealed or amended by central government in the same way as any statute.

Federal systems, or federations, differ in that state or provincial government is guaranteed in the constitution. Australia, Canada, India, and the United States have federal systems, and have constitutions (as do some of their constituent states or provinces). They also have territories, with less power and authority than a state or province. Non-English-speaking federations include Mexico, Germany, and Switzerland.
In the United Kingdom, devolved government was created following simple majority referenda in Wales and Scotland in September 1997 and in London in May 1998. In between 1998 and 1999, the Scottish Parliament, National Assembly for Wales, Northern Ireland Assembly and London Assembly were established by law. The Campaign for an English Parliament was formed in 1998 supports English devolution, a separate English parliament or assembly. Yorkshire, Wessex, Lindsey and Mercia have similar but fringe local groupings.[citation needed] Scotland will hold a referendum in September 2014 which asks citizens whether Scotland should be an independent country.[6]

[RidonKs]

When is Quebec gonna secede? That seems far more likely than say, Texas seceding.
it won't happen. the most recent federal election and the provincial election last fall sealed the fate of the separatist movement hopefully for good.

quebec makes for a fascinating case study on the topic of sovereignty and cultural independence though.

[NumberSix]

The UK is a single sovereign state. Not a loose confederation of states, or even a federation of states like the U.S.

I don't believe it's composed of separate countries in any legal sense. They're separate countries only in the sense that the people who live in different regions have separate national histories, and maintain ethnic distinctions between each other.

Scotland can secede, while Texas cannot, only because the U.K government is willing to allow it, and the U.S government isn't.
You have to understand, the British Isles are much older than America so it's a little more complicated.

Unlike American states, the countries of the UK have slightly differing legal standings. For example, Scotland has it's own parliament while England, Wales and N.Ireland don't.

There's also the issue of political terms and geographical terms. The word "country" isn't specifically either.

[MavsSuperFan]

and if referendums showed the vast majority of alaskans preferred joining the english commonwealth as a sovereign entity? and upon marine intervention, they rose up in protest and violent struggle?

then what?
**** those traitors then. sovereign territory of the US (especially when its a resource rich area, alaska also has importance as it is vital to place early warning radar systems and ABM missile batteries, there for NORAD. Eg because russian missiles if they are ever launched will come from that direction.) should be defend from foreign and internal threats. Insurrectionists are essentially traitors.


dude just this past fall thousands protested military strikes against syria. bomb scotland right across a land border? are you ****ing serious?

that was harsh lol no its extremely unlikely = no chance whatsoever
Also syria is half way around the world, Ill be honest i dont care about syria really, eg absolutely no way do i support ground troops, and would prefer we didnt waste money bombing them. I do care about US core territory, if the US military cant hold on to the core 50 states, what is its purpose?.

[MavsSuperFan]

Maybe what you don't understand is that Scotland is not a state. It's a country. The United Kingdom is a union of 4 countries (Wales is a little tricky though) Not states of a single country, although the UK is kind of a country. A country of countries.
scotland isnt yet a country, thats why they are having the vote. there are only 2 offical countries on those islands, the UK and the republic of ireland. Northern ireland is still a region of the UK

Maybe I am wrong, but I tend to think in the past england would have militarily intervened to secure control of scotland against the wishes of the inhabitants. The english have become less imperial for various reasons. Eg. liberalisation and the fact that they are not the military force they used to be.

[MavsSuperFan]

You have to understand, the British Isles are much older than America so it's a little more complicated.

Unlike American states, the countries of the UK have slightly differing legal standings. For example, Scotland has it's own parliament while England, Wales and N.Ireland don't.

There's also the issue of political terms and geographical terms. The word "country" isn't specifically either.
Texas was actually an independant country once.
Republic of Texas March 2, 1836, to February 19, 1846. Doesnt change the fact that it is a state now, and the federal government has a right to prevent the secession of any state.

[MMM]

**** those traitors then. sovereign territory of the US (especially when its a resource rich area, alaska also has importance as it is vital to place early warning radar systems and ABM missile batteries, there for NORAD. Eg because russian missiles if they are ever launched will come from that direction.) should be defend from foreign and internal threats. Insurrectionists are essentially traitors.


Also syria is half way around the world, Ill be honest i dont care about syria really, eg absolutely no way do i support ground troops, and would prefer we didnt waste money bombing them. I do care about US core territory, if the US military cant hold on to the core 50 states, what is its purpose?.

America doesn't need Alaska to remain a state to enjoy the benefits you mentioned, if they did than they might as well invade the entire north.

I think it's interesting that you support Kurds separating but would react the same to them if they were in your backyard.

[MavsSuperFan]

yes it would. that's a difference between the two countries worth considering.

also worth considering is how public opinion would compare with institutional action in such a scenario. say texas secedes tomorrow... who says it has a right to self determination and can exit the union under certain conditions? alternatively, who call it tantamount to a betrayal of the mighty national sovereignty.

likely, the truth would reside somewhere in the middle. bear in mind i have plenty of experience with this kind of national dilemma. in your life time, america has not. canada has been dealing with quebec nationalism and threats to secede for decades now. it's been the canadian issue. we've attempted three constitutional overhauls in that time span (only one passed under shady circumstances). quebec separation would be even more catastrophic for my neck of the woods. it would cut the maritimes (nova scotia, new brunswick, pie) aka the least developed part of the country off from the rest of the continent. important stuff.

the closest it came was in the late 70s when an organization called the flq murdered a high ranking quebecois congressman in the culmination of a series of terrorist plots. how did pierre trudeau our prime minister of the time respond to this crisis? he invoked the war measures act and sent in the armed forces and arrested everybody presumed to be affiliated with the crimes being committed. there were 497 people arrested in the days after this decision. 435 have been released.

there you have it. good job pierre.

since then there have been multiple attempts to pass a referendum on "independence" or "sovereignty" or "nationhood" or for some kind of special relationship with the federal canadian government. who the fk knows. the last referendum was in 95 and left the issue with even more haze. independence narrowly lost.

but had independence won, what would have been the right action to take for jean chretian? certainly not to send in the armed forces i wouldn't think.

the same isn't true in the united states for other reasons.
Why would it not be appropriate to send in military forces to defend the sovereign territory of a country? your country would be bisected by this secession. The people voting for secession are essentially traitors, internal aggression is worse than foreign aggression


also worth considering is how public opinion would compare with institutional action in such a scenario. say texas secedes tomorrow... who says it has a right to self determination and can exit the union under certain conditions? alternatively, who call it tantamount to a betrayal of the mighty national sovereignty.

likely, the truth would reside somewhere in the middle.
I am originally from texas and have most of my family living there.
Texas would probably benefit from secession. It has a population of over 26 million people (more than a lot of countries)

It would be the 40th largest country in the world by land size

in terms of economy

It would be the 14th largest economy in the world, bigger than South Korea or the Netherlands, and roughly equivalent to two Switzerlands.

Its gross domestic product of $1.2 trillion, or 8 percent of the entire U.S. GDP, placed it just behind Spain, and one notch above its neighbor Mexico, in the 2011 rankings compiled by the International Monetary Fund.


To power all of this, Texas has a lot of oil, producing about 2 million barrels per day.

Texas is one of the states that pays more to the in taxes federal government than the federal government spends in texas. Texas is one of the states that support the union, unlike many states that welch off the federal government.

With that said the Federal government would be fully right to force texas to stay and hold on to the natural resources of the area.

[MMM]

The Quebec issue is more complex than that, essentially it is about preserving a french identity in NA. If they have a right to self determination than I would think sending in troops would violate international law and sanctions would come into play.

[NumberSix]

scotland isnt yet a country, thats why they are having the vote. there are only 2 offical countries on those islands, the UK and the republic of ireland. Northern ireland is still a region of the UK

Maybe I am wrong, but I tend to think in the past england would have militarily intervened to secure control of scotland against the wishes of the inhabitants. The english have become less imperial for various reasons. Eg. liberalisation and the fact that they are not the military force they used to be.
Scotland is a country. It's just not an politically independent country.

The UK can't be directly compard to America. Think of it more along the lines of the European Union. France and Germany are separate countries. They have the same money (€, the euro) and they send elected politicians to the EU parliament to vote on laws that apply to all EU countries. Their borders are open. They're still separate countries.

Now, it's not EXACTLY the same as the EU, but it's not like America either. For example, England has it's own team for the World Cup. There's no Texas team. England is a country despite not being independent.

Herds a little video that might help a little bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10

[MavsSuperFan]

America doesn't need Alaska to remain a state to enjoy the benefits you mentioned, if they did than they might as well invade the entire north.

I think it's interesting that you support Kurds separating but would react the same to them if they were in your backyard.
You're right that NORAD has radar stations throughout canada (incase the russians launch ICBMs across the north pole.)

But the federal government would have to negotiate treaties for stuff like ABM missile banks, ICBM emplacements, radar stations, etc with any alaskan government that was independent. Currently the federal government can establish any installation it wants in alaska.

losing control of alaska would rob us of its vast natural resources,

Alaska has vast energy resources. Major oil and gas reserves are found in the Alaska North Slope (ANS) and Cook Inlet basins. According to the Energy Information Administration, Alaska ranks second in the nation in crude oil production. Prudhoe Bay on Alaska's North Slope is the highest yielding oil field in the United States and on North America, typically producing about 400,000 barrels per day (64,000 m3/d).

The Trans-Alaska Pipeline can pump up to 2.1 million barrels (330,000 m3) of crude oil per day, more than any other crude oil pipeline in the United States. Additionally, substantial coal deposits are found in Alaska's bituminous, sub-bituminous, and lignite coal basins. The United States Geological Survey estimates that there are 85.4 trillion cubic feet (2,420 km3) of undiscovered, technically recoverable gas from natural gas hydrates on the Alaskan North Slope.[11] Alaska also offers some of the highest hydroelectric power potential in the country from its numerous rivers. Large swaths of the Alaskan coastline offer wind and geothermal energy potential as well

Alaska is essential to US energy policy and defense policy.

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) is an emergency fuel storage of oil maintained by the United States Department of Energy. It is the largest emergency supply in the world with the capacity to hold up to 727 million barrels (115,600,000 m3).
We need that oil to power our economy and military if necessary.


I think it's interesting that you support Kurds separating but would react the same to them if they were in your backyard.
I support the kurds for 3 reasons.
1. an independent kurdistan or even a kurdish area with significant autonomy benefits American FP goals. A united, democratic Iraq is going to be Shia lead, which means it will be Iranian influenced. the Kurds would be sympathetic to americans.
2. The kurdish people are amongst the most abused ethnicities in human history. Oppressed by the turkish ottoman empire in the past, and now by arabs and turks. It would be nice to see them have self determination
3. IMO the only way to end the iraqi civil war is either one group emerging to dominate or to split the country into shia, sunni and kurdish regions. Partition is preferable to domination

With that said I wouldnt hold it against baghdad for trying to seize the northern kurdish areas. Just doubt they could, especially if america arms the kurds and buys oil from them

[step_back]

I don't care if they leave. I just hope they don't get to cherry pick what they want and discard the rest. There is already tension because they want to keep the pound because it's stronger than the Euro. If they want out they lose the benefits too.

[Inactive]

Scotland is a country. It's just not an politically independent country.What is a country then? They aren't in any way geographically distinct from the rest of Great Britain. They aren't an independent state either. The only thing that seems to separate them from the rest of the island is the fact that their population insists on having a separate national identity, for historical reasons.


The UK can't be directly compard to America. Think of it more along the lines of the European Union.If anything the U.S is more comparable to the EU than the U.K is.

The EU is a confederation of states, which have sovereign rights. The EU can't impose anything on it's member states; they can just refuse to follow it's mandates, and leave. The U.S is a federation of states, which have limited independence, and their own legislatures. The U.K is a unitary state. The U.K parliament can dissolve any regional government, and impose whatever it wants on the whole of the country.

[NumberSix]

What is a country then? They aren't in any way geographically distinct from the rest of Great Britain. They aren't an independent state either. The only thing that seems to separate them from the rest of the island is the fact that their population insists on having a separate national identity, for historical reasons.
Not all of Scotland is part of Great Britain.

The UK is not as easy to explain as new countries like America. It's like trying to explain why London and the city of London aren't the same thing. There are a lot 1000-2000 year old laws and customs that nobody even knows the origin of. The UK has a lot of weird and seemingly unintuitive laws.

You can't think of it like a direct comparison to America. America doesn't have the same history of kingdoms and weird legal agreements. America also doesn't have god as a legal entity.

[BlackWhiteGreen]

I'm pretty solidly against Independence. The mess created by thesplit would be enough to lose the country a shitload of money regardless of us losing the oil. The pound opened at some ridiculous low today and there's only 1 reason for that

[Nick Young]

http://oi62.tinypic.com/311mnog.jpg
:lol

[Nick Young]

Does scotland have anything to offer the UK that UK will lose? How will Scotland stand on its own two feet if they become independent? What industry does it have? How long will it take for them to join the EU?

What will happen to Scottish pound notes, how long until they become obsolete?

[NumberSix]

Does scotland have anything to offer the UK that UK will lose? How will Scotland stand on its own two feet if they become independent? What industry does it have? How long will it take for them to join the EU?

What will happen to Scottish pound notes, how long until they become obsolete?
You're crazy if you think the UK won't miss Scotland's maritime territory. Especially if Scotland is smart enough to disregard the EU's nonsense fishing rules.