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.