ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 21st December 2019, 01:54 PM   #121
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Scotland and Ireland are the small countries on the edge of Europe, the furthest from the main threat (if it is much of a threat) of the Russians.

The chances of the Russians getting through the countries we are in effect hiding behind is nil.

For the main European nations, knowing that there is no chance of attack from the west is very important strategically. Ireland was a huge help to the UK during WWII, especially all the Irish who came to fight with the British.

Ireland only uses its armed forces to nominally protect Ireland and in reality, to join with peacekeeping missions via NATO or the UN. It also supplies many people who join the British armed forces, which they are entitled to do.

It makes sense that Scotland should have a similar set up to Ireland. If Scots want to go abroad and fight wars, join the British armed forces (or what ever it is called post independence). Otherwise, Scotland nominally protects itself and will participate in peacekeeping.
One of the front lines in a Russia / NATO conflict is the Iceland / Scotland gap. Scotland is on the front line.

Ireland is dependant on the UK for its fast jet cover. This is a formal arrangement and is why the UK delivers air traffic control over Irish airspace.

Many of 'Scotland's' resources are those of the Northern Isles, who want devolution or independence from Scotland just as the Faros have achieved from Denmark (like most other North Atlantic Nations (Iceland Green Land Norway) the Faroe Islands are not part of the EU). They see a distant government with little understanding of the culture or needs of the islands, who exploit their natural resources for the benefit of the southern urban centres. The problem is once there is a reorganisation, the outcome may be different from what was expected.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2019, 02:10 PM   #122
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by ceptimus View Post
Not how democracy works. Normally, when a democracy elects a government or President, then that's it - you don't get another vote for four or five years - whatever the fixed or maximum term is. Why should repeated referendums on the same topic be any different?

I argue that referendum decisions on constitutional matters should have a much greater lifespan than a normal government term - but I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise if I agree with rational arguments in favour of shorter intervals.
I think referenda are different because they usually result in a one way move. You elect a government every four years but usually the government elected does not change the constitution. It is not as if there will be a guaranteed re vote after e.g. seven years to reverse the indy vote. The indy votes will continue until one is won even by the smallest margin then there will be no more.

I would argue that there should be a final vote once all the details had been negotiated to confirm 'go'. Just as was argued for Brexit. It would alter my views if an independent Scotland negotiated entry to the EU on condition there was a hard border with England, and no common travel zone because Scotland would need to be part of the EU common travel zone. Losing easy access to the closest market might in the long term be compensated for by EU trade but it would be difficult in the short term.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2019, 03:05 PM   #123
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,513
Oh not that old propaganda about the northern isles wanting to be independent again. Change the record why don't you.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2019, 05:09 PM   #124
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Oh not that old propaganda about the northern isles wanting to be independent again. Change the record why don't you.
You just don't understand the view from the north.

Whether you look at the genetics of the population, the voting record, or the insistence of the SG in imposing a foreign culture (gaelic) on the Northern Isles, you are just not prepared to accept that we have a different culture and different politics from Scotland. As a clearly separate geographic unit (unlike Scotland which has no clear demarcation from England), surely you can accept there is a right of self-determination. The Northern Isles have the natural resources to be a successful independent policy like the Faros, just as other small islands are like the Channel islands.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 06:38 AM   #125
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,513
So set up a political party, stand in elections and let's see how many people vote for you.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 07:15 AM   #126
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,790
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Oh not that old propaganda about the northern isles wanting to be independent again. Change the record why don't you.
Seriously?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 07:54 AM   #127
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12,518
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
One of the front lines in a Russia / NATO conflict is the Iceland / Scotland gap. Scotland is on the front line.

Ireland is dependant on the UK for its fast jet cover. This is a formal arrangement and is why the UK delivers air traffic control over Irish airspace.
Russia is not going to send a seaborn invasion fleet from the north. There is no threat there.

Quote:
Many of 'Scotland's' resources are those of the Northern Isles, who want devolution or independence from Scotland just as the Faros have achieved from Denmark (like most other North Atlantic Nations (Iceland Green Land Norway) the Faroe Islands are not part of the EU). They see a distant government with little understanding of the culture or needs of the islands, who exploit their natural resources for the benefit of the southern urban centres. The problem is once there is a reorganisation, the outcome may be different from what was expected.
The Wir Shetland movement (from their facebook page 1,128 followers out of 23,000 Shetlanders);

"WIR SHETLAND is a multi-party campaign group dedicated to winning self-governing powers for Shetland.

Our preferred approach is to involve local political parties in discussions aimed at achieving our goal. However, the option of registering as a political party will be considered if necessary.

OUR PURPOSE:
To protect the long term interests of Shetlanders by achieving self-governing autonomy, in line with the democratic wishes of residents.

OUR AIMS:
To achieve Falkland Islands-style British Overseas Territory or similar, status"
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 08:01 AM   #128
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,556
SNP spokesman 2012.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-Scotland.html
'Shetland and Orkney would be permitted to remain part of the UK regardless of the referendum result “if there was a big enough drive for self-determination” among their residents.'

Alternatively perhaps Norway would redeem the debt, which they may be entitled to and regain sovereignty!

Last edited by Planigale; 22nd December 2019 at 08:03 AM.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 08:20 AM   #129
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Architect View Post
It depends on what you mean by "ugly".



There's not going to be violence on the streets, or at least not any more than a normal Saturday night in Glasgow.


What will be interesting is that if BoJo doesn't address the issue properly, it will bolster the SNP position and help build support for a future independence vote.
Yeah, there's no precedence whatsoever for a member of the UK developing a violent insurgency to attempt to force independence. That could never happen.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 02:23 PM   #130
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,713
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Seriously?


Never was the aphorism "What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" more aptly contradicted, huh........
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 02:25 PM   #131
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,713
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Yeah, there's no precedence whatsoever for a member of the UK developing a violent insurgency to attempt to force independence. That could never happen.


In the 21st Century? With the structure of international law and the UN at its current level of evolution?

(Again: see Catalonia for a decent 21st Century comparator....)
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 02:26 PM   #132
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,513
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Seriously?

Yes, seriously. This wheeze was first dreamed up in Westminster some time in the 1980s (or earlier?) as a talking point against Scottish independence. It is constantly trotted out by all and sundry as a "gotcha" in discussions about Scottish independence. In reality there is little serious support for anything like this in the northern isles. If there were serious support, then there is a clear democratic route to promote their cause, just as the SNP has taken the same democratic route to promote Scottish independence.

The double standards are clear. "Scotland, don't dare think about independence, you're too wee and too poor and besides we won't let you. And if you keep talking about it, then we'll talk up support for independence for the northern isles, who of course are in no way too wee or too poor and should have every encouragement!"

Nobody even seems clear what they're talking about. Is it complete independence for the northern isles? Is it to remain part of England? Is it to become part of Norway? All of these are very different outcomes with different arguments and different problems. A particular one which intrigues me is this joining with Norway thing. In what way is being governed by Norway so desirable, when on the other hand every suggestion from Scots that we'd quite like to make our own government more similar to the Nordic model is greeted with scorn and derision and in particular with cries that beer costs about 100 a pint in Norway and you can only buy it from government-controlled stores, and their tax rates are astrononomically high.

Much of the argument is fantasy football, like the notion that Norway could just unilaterally decide to pay some sum of money and appropriate the northern isles at will. Or that somehow Shetland would accrue most of Scotland's oil reserves. That isn't the case. Under most circumstances the northern isles would be treated as an enclave within Scottish waters and only entitled to a small radius of territory which doesn't include any oil.

It's not a serious discussion, it's trotted out as a "gotcha", which was exactly why it was dreamed up in the first place, and I for one am tired of it. If the northern isles have aspirations to independence or some sort of semi-detached status then they're entirely free to organise and campaign for that, either within the UK union as it is, or from an independent Scotland in due course. Carry on. Put your money where your mouth is. Stand candidates, win seats, build support, put together a credible case.

Otherwise we know it's just a petulant, sneering, manufactured gotcha.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 02:33 PM   #133
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,513
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Yeah, there's no precedence whatsoever for a member of the UK developing a violent insurgency to attempt to force independence. That could never happen.

At the moment it seems very unlikely. There is no history of violence in the Scottish independence movement beyond the odd maverick nutter, and the incident back in the sixties (I think it was) when the British security services acted as agents provocateurs to try to get some hot-headed independence supporters to carry out some violent act to tarnish the movement. The independence marches of recent years have been spectacularly peaceful and good-natured.

However, if the attitude we're seeing from Westminster hardens, this could change. The consideration of the Scottish independence movement has always been that we have a democratic route to independence and that being the case there is not reason and no excuse for violence. However, recent rhetoric about "we will never allow another independence referendum" changes that. If it becomes plain that there is in fact no possible democratic route to independence, the non-violent nature of the campaign could change, and that is a real worry.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 05:03 PM   #134
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Yes, seriously. This wheeze was first dreamed up in Westminster some time in the 1980s (or earlier?) as a talking point against Scottish independence. It is constantly trotted out by all and sundry as a "gotcha" in discussions about Scottish independence. In reality there is little serious support for anything like this in the northern isles. If there were serious support, then there is a clear democratic route to promote their cause, just as the SNP has taken the same democratic route to promote Scottish independence.

The double standards are clear. "Scotland, don't dare think about independence, you're too wee and too poor and besides we won't let you. And if you keep talking about it, then we'll talk up support for independence for the northern isles, who of course are in no way too wee or too poor and should have every encouragement!"

Nobody even seems clear what they're talking about. Is it complete independence for the northern isles? Is it to remain part of England? Is it to become part of Norway? All of these are very different outcomes with different arguments and different problems. A particular one which intrigues me is this joining with Norway thing. In what way is being governed by Norway so desirable, when on the other hand every suggestion from Scots that we'd quite like to make our own government more similar to the Nordic model is greeted with scorn and derision and in particular with cries that beer costs about 100 a pint in Norway and you can only buy it from government-controlled stores, and their tax rates are astrononomically high.

Much of the argument is fantasy football, like the notion that Norway could just unilaterally decide to pay some sum of money and appropriate the northern isles at will. Or that somehow Shetland would accrue most of Scotland's oil reserves. That isn't the case. Under most circumstances the northern isles would be treated as an enclave within Scottish waters and only entitled to a small radius of territory which doesn't include any oil.

It's not a serious discussion, it's trotted out as a "gotcha", which was exactly why it was dreamed up in the first place, and I for one am tired of it. If the northern isles have aspirations to independence or some sort of semi-detached status then they're entirely free to organise and campaign for that, either within the UK union as it is, or from an independent Scotland in due course. Carry on. Put your money where your mouth is. Stand candidates, win seats, build support, put together a credible case.

Otherwise we know it's just a petulant, sneering, manufactured gotcha.
Of course they are doing that*. The Islands Bill is intended to deliver a degree of devolution. One thing that is clear is that delivering a degree of devolution does not satiate the desire for more independence. There is a campaign to increase autonomy, to redirect income from oil and gas to the local communities.

You may not think it is serious but have you spent anytime in the Northern Isles?

You sound just like English Tories who deny the right of Scotland to argue for independence. 'You are not clear about what you want. You are too small to be viable as an independent nation. There is not a clear will of the people for independence.'

Yes there are multiple options; but the point I was making is that during any independence negotiations in the event of a pro-independence referendum this will come up. The Northern Isles will want to redefine their association with an independent Scotland. It is very unlikely given that the Northern Isles consistently have the lowest vote for the SNP in Scotland and the lowest vote for independence that they will suddenly become pro-independence even if the referendum as a whole is pro-independence. The concept that a broad geographic vote on Brexit or Westminster government should not bind a separate geographical area that voted differently has been established as valid by the SNP; this will then be a negotiating point in any independence settlement. The Northern Isles are far more a separate geographic element from Scotland, than Scotland is from England. The Northern Isles have been part of the UK for longer than they have been part of Scotland (pre union).

*Orkney Independents got >80% of the vote in the last local elections.

Last edited by Planigale; 22nd December 2019 at 05:08 PM.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 05:13 PM   #135
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,713
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
At the moment it seems very unlikely. There is no history of violence in the Scottish independence movement beyond the odd maverick nutter, and the incident back in the sixties (I think it was) when the British security services acted as agents provocateurs to try to get some hot-headed independence supporters to carry out some violent act to tarnish the movement. The independence marches of recent years have been spectacularly peaceful and good-natured.

However, if the attitude we're seeing from Westminster hardens, this could change. The consideration of the Scottish independence movement has always been that we have a democratic route to independence and that being the case there is not reason and no excuse for violence. However, recent rhetoric about "we will never allow another independence referendum" changes that. If it becomes plain that there is in fact no possible democratic route to independence, the non-violent nature of the campaign could change, and that is a real worry.


Hmm.

And by the way, there was a democratic route to Scottish independence. It came by way of the most democratic instrument of all: a referendum. In which the majority of votes were in favour of remaining within the UK. A "once in a generation" referendum.

And since we're talking about democracy, it's strange how the SNP seem unable to grasp the democratic concept that the whole (that's to say the UK - and not "the English") gets to decide whether or not one part of the whole gets offered the opportunity to break away from the whole. That's how it works. It's not a technicality, and nor is it in any way an unjust instrument. The UK parliament, based in Westminster, gets to decide.

I know I keep bringing it up, but see the Catalonia example.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 05:21 PM   #136
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,713
PS: I think it's a misdirection to claim that the decision about whether or not the UK parliament should grant the right for Scotland to hold another independence referendum includes the claim that Scotland is too small and too impoverished (or, umm, "too wee and too poor") to survive on its own. I think there are clear economic indicators to suggest that an independent Scotland would be worse off economically than a Scotland remaining within the UK, but that's a very different argument from scaremongering about collapse etc.

In fact, it's in so many ways similar to things raised in the Brexit debate: the more strident Remainers were trying to claim that a post-Brexit UK would fall to pieces, but a more accurate and balanced analysis would be that Brexit UK will be worse off than a UK remaining within the EU.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2019, 05:59 PM   #137
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,513
I don't have any particular objection to the idea of some sort of autonomy or even independence for the northern isles if that is demonstrably what the majority of the people there want. At present, I repeat, there is no sign that is the case. And the label a popular independent local councillor chooses to run under doesn't count as evidence that it is.

So carry on. Build your party, attract support, make your case. No skin off my nose either way. The Faeroes are doing just fine, so there's no particular argument against the idea. (And by the way, the same argument goes for Wales.)

What I do get seriously fed up with is the constant "gotcha" by unionists who simultaneously oppose the idea of Scottish independence with every fibre of their being, but who suddenly discover a deep enthusiasm for Shetland's independence when they imagine that that eventuality would impoverish Scotland. (Spoiler: It wouldn't.)
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 01:35 AM   #138
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I don't have any particular objection to the idea of some sort of autonomy or even independence for the northern isles if that is demonstrably what the majority of the people there want. At present, I repeat, there is no sign that is the case. And the label a popular independent local councillor chooses to run under doesn't count as evidence that it is.

So carry on. Build your party, attract support, make your case. No skin off my nose either way. The Faeroes are doing just fine, so there's no particular argument against the idea. (And by the way, the same argument goes for Wales.)

What I do get seriously fed up with is the constant "gotcha" by unionists who simultaneously oppose the idea of Scottish independence with every fibre of their being, but who suddenly discover a deep enthusiasm for Shetland's independence when they imagine that that eventuality would impoverish Scotland. (Spoiler: It wouldn't.)
So to go back to the point I originally intended to convey, what I have learnt from Brexit is that the actual shape of any independence is likely to be unclear until detailed negotiations have been undertaken. Including any possible deal with the EU. I have learnt that trade deals are difficult and a small nation such as the UK gets a poorer deal than a large block such as the EU. Scotland will need to go through all the issues like recognition of vehicle registration, aircraft registration, trade deals, all of which are the problems with Brexit for the UK as an established nation and are likely to be even greater problems for a new nation.

I would consider a provisional YES if there was the option of voting on the final deal as was suggested for Brexit.

Referenda are not the same as elections that are held on a permanent regular basis. I am unhappy that they will be held every few years justified by some 'change in circumstance', until eventually one gets the answer the SNP wants then they are never held again. I think in this circumstance you need a clear majority e.g. 60% or agree that it has to be confirmed on two successive votes at east a year apart.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 03:04 AM   #139
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,513
I think the problem with a confirmatory vote is that the knowledge that there will be one poisons negotiations and encourages people who want the process to fail to propose and agree a lousy deal. I also don't think these details are as big a deal as you think.

As regards repeated referendums, I think a second defeat in what are quite possibly the most favourable conditions we'll ever see, with people from all corners shouting "Run, Scotland!", economists declaring how favourable independence would be compared to Brexit Britain and the EU all but coming out with the welcome mat, would probably put the issue to bed for a long time. The reason it didn't go away in 2015 was firstly because the promises made to secure a Yes vote were never delivered, with the broken promises starting before dawn broke on the 19th, and in particular Brexit after we'd been assured that the only way to retain our EU membership was a No vote. It's not simply a question of re-running the referendum at regular intervals, it's about there being significant popular demand for another referendum.

The same goes the other way. If, after independence, there were to be significant popular demand to change that status, to negotiate a new union with England or whatever, there's no barrier to that happening. No country that has escaped the tender clutches of British rule has ever petitioned to go back though. Gosh I wonder why.

I also think a supermajority has its problems. If say 58% of the population want independence, and this percentage is constant, you can't squash that by continually raising the bar for a vote to be valid. That way lies violence, very probably.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 23rd December 2019 at 03:07 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 03:50 AM   #140
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,326
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Nope. Protected geographical status has worldwide legal implications. Otherwise, for example, you'd already have things such as "Californian Champagne".
American "Champagne" is already a thing, the US is very bad for ignoring other countries regional designations. However the peculiarities of the high end wine market have lead to a situation where quality American wines in the Champagne style are correctly labelled as simply sparkling wine while cheap bulk wines (which are not bound for export anyway) are (sometimes) labelled as Champagne.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 04:24 AM   #141
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: I try to be a moving target
Posts: 15,341
Extracting the UK from the EU is a massive headache and that is with only a small amount of delegated powers. Given the powers in Westminster it will be a total nightmare extracting them and recreating them in Scotland. I am at a loss at how the Irish border problem highlighted by the SNP disappears when Scotland leaves the Union.
It is staggering how people who consider it outrageous that people in one area, Scotland, are denied the option of independence, while at the same time denying the option of independence to people in another area, the Northern Isles.
Scotland's best hope after independence would be to attract the city of London North. That depends on the ability of the Westminster negotiators to strike a deal that allows the city to carry on as is outside the EU.
I suspect that an independent Scotland would render my Highland 2nd home worthless, but you never know I may retire there if against all odds they succeed and thrive.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 04:58 AM   #142
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,513
Who is denying the option of independence to the northern isles? Do tell.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 05:21 AM   #143
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,779
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
No country that has escaped the tender clutches of British rule has ever petitioned to go back though. Gosh I wonder why.
You could make that argument for the Falkland islands though. The actual mechanism and evens were different and they aren't a country but they had a chance to experience life under a different country and, when asked, opted to remain a part of UK instead.

Plus I think Hong Kongers might not entirely agree with you either.

Quote:
I also think a supermajority has its problems. If say 58% of the population want independence, and this percentage is constant, you can't squash that by continually raising the bar for a vote to be valid. That way lies violence, very probably.
A supermajority is a reasonable request for major constitutional changes, such as Brexit or Scottish independance both. There could be further compromises for a more independent policy if there is a majority or else a plurality vote in favor. Of course consistently raising the bar is a major issue, but I think 60% in favor is a good bar on such questions and should be applied consistently.

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه

Last edited by McHrozni; 23rd December 2019 at 05:24 AM.
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 07:54 AM   #144
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: I try to be a moving target
Posts: 15,341
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Who is denying the option of independence to the northern isles? Do tell.
I am glad that post independence that the SNP will give the islands a vote on their own independence I understand that they oppose independence for Scotland and it is great that the SNP are being consistent in their principles in wanting the people of the islands to decide.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 01:55 PM   #145
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12,518
Originally Posted by Lothian View Post
I am glad that post independence that the SNP will give the islands a vote on their own independence I understand that they oppose independence for Scotland and it is great that the SNP are being consistent in their principles in wanting the people of the islands to decide.
If enough want to go ahead with greater independence, so be it. But there is nothing to show significant levels of support.

If Shetland ends up being to Scotland what the Isle of Man is to the UK, so be it.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 03:46 PM   #146
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 23,525
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
So, either in a foreign country, a port that is home to two oil refineries, two chemical plants and supertanker traffic or in the middle of a major population area with no possible storage location for the warheads?
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 03:48 PM   #147
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 23,525
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Russia is not going to send a seaborn invasion fleet from the north. There is no threat there.
It is the route in to the Atlantic for Russian ships and subs. It is the 'front for any potential naval war with Russia.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2019, 11:11 PM   #148
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 25,043
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
So, either in a foreign country, a port that is home to two oil refineries, two chemical plants and supertanker traffic or in the middle of a major population area with no possible storage location for the warheads?
I live about 25 miles from the US's main west coast submarine base, including Trident carriers. As far as I know (and the Navy, of course, won't officially say), warheads are stored right there. Seattle is 20 miles from there in the other direction.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2019, 01:08 AM   #149
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
It is the route in to the Atlantic for Russian ships and subs. It is the 'front for any potential naval war with Russia.
Thank you.

Yes, I was about to comment that the 'Battle of the Atlantic' had been critical in the last two world wars.

In addition a key strategic asset likely to be targeted by Russia is North Sea oil and gas, particularly the latter. A neutral Scotland would either have to decide to embargo NATO / EU countries or defend its North Sea assets and pipelines against Russian action.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2019, 01:11 AM   #150
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
I live about 25 miles from the US's main west coast submarine base, including Trident carriers. As far as I know (and the Navy, of course, won't officially say), warheads are stored right there. Seattle is 20 miles from there in the other direction.
When I visited San Diego, there appeared to be Nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers some of which may have carried nuclear warheads, pretty much in the centre of the city.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2019, 09:15 AM   #151
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,336
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Hmm.

And by the way, there was a democratic route to Scottish independence. It came by way of the most democratic instrument of all: a referendum. In which the majority of votes were in favour of remaining within the UK.
The situation has materially changed since then.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2019, 09:25 AM   #152
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 25,043
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
When I visited San Diego, there appeared to be Nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers some of which may have carried nuclear warheads, pretty much in the centre of the city.
Yeah. US policy is of course "We can neither confirm nor deny..." but the Brits seem to be far more conservative with their basing.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th December 2019, 10:33 AM   #153
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,621
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Who is denying the option of independence to the northern isles? Do tell.
That would be BoJo and the parliament in Westminster.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th December 2019, 10:35 AM   #154
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,621
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
So, either in a foreign country, a port that is home to two oil refineries, two chemical plants and supertanker traffic or in the middle of a major population area with no possible storage location for the warheads?
Yep. So no problems there. But I'm sure the separation for warhead loading isn't really necessary...
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th December 2019, 08:42 PM   #155
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montani Semper Liberi
Posts: 3,394
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
It was Brex-zit, so Scot-zit. Or it could be Scots-it.
Scotoodaloo?

ScoTFOH?
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th December 2019, 08:50 PM   #156
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
Yep. So no problems there. But I'm sure the separation for warhead loading isn't really necessary...
I'm not familiar enough with the Scottish Independence movement's intent. Would an independent Scotland want to stay in NATO? Being as Scotland is as described, key to any war between NATO and Russia, I'm not sure what choice it would have.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th December 2019, 08:51 PM   #157
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,576
What would the impact of Scotland holding a referendum without the consent of the British Parliament? I realize it wouldn't be binding but it would certainly not go unnoticed if there was a vote for independence.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2019, 01:30 AM   #158
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 6,205
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
What would the impact of Scotland holding a referendum without the consent of the British Parliament? I realize it wouldn't be binding but it would certainly not go unnoticed if there was a vote for independence.
It's exactly the sort of thing the SNP would like: if the vote was Yes they'd claim it was a mandate for independence; if it was No they'd claim that it didn't really mean anything because the nasty English had refused to respect the referendum and that leave supporting Scots had therefore abstained in protest.

In the unlikely event that over 50% of those eligible to vote had voted No, then the abstained excuse wouldn't work. I don't know what excuse the SNP would come up with in that case, but I'm sure they'd invent one.

The way to work out what the SNP will do over any issue is simply to remember that they will never ever stop striving for another independence vote, no matter how many times they may have previously lost. The clue is in the name of the party - independence is the issue they exist for.

Last edited by ceptimus; 27th December 2019 at 01:38 AM.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2019, 02:27 AM   #159
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 27,853
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
What would the impact of Scotland holding a referendum without the consent of the British Parliament? I realize it wouldn't be binding but it would certainly not go unnoticed if there was a vote for independence.
Depends on the turnout and result.

A thumping pro-independence result based on relatively low turnout (like in Catalonia) would likely just muddy the waters with the UK government claiming that it's just a few zealots and the SNP claiming a clear mandate for independence. I hope the UK government wouldn't botch the aftermath of any such vote as badly as the Spanish, but I wouldn't bet on it.

A more uncomfortable position would be a clear pro-independence vote based on a reasonably high turnout. In that case I reckon that the government would claim that there was no independence mandate unless there was a majority (or supermajority) of those entitled to vote, rather than those who actually voted - which would be rich considering how 52/48 (of under 70%) is a clear Brexit mandate from a non-binding referendum .

IMO a Conservative government would simply refuse to recognise the result of any such referendum (because it had been called illegally) and that illegal action would be used as a reason to refuse future independence referendum requests.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2019, 04:43 AM   #160
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,790
To be honest it would be no more important than any other poll such as one run by YouGov.

I would also expect legal action to be taken if any Scottish government assets were to be used as it would clearly be an abuse of power by the Scottish government. It is simply not a devolved power it has.

I'm more with Rolfe on this, I think it was a rare political mistake the SNP leadership made in one saying it would only run a referendum if it had the power to do so and secondly supporting a general election that no one but the Tories would profit from. I think the SNP expected to be "kingmakers" so could get a new referendum as the price of their support for a minority labour government.

It is hard to see why in terms of politics the current UK government would allow a new referendum. What is in it for them?

Sadly for Scotland the UK is here to stay no matter what for at least the next 5 years.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:10 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.