KateB Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 It's like when they start selling 'Back to School' stuff well before the Summer holidays even begin! For goodness sake, let us enjoy the moment!! Quote
Saruman the White Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 Do the Scottish members here want to stay British? Quote
Mr Man Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 I'm not Scottish but I would vote for their independence if we where aloud to vote south of the border. (It feels weird referring to myself as south of anything, I'm from Yorkshire). Quote
zed0 Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 I've lived in Scotland for most of my life but I wouldn't vote for independence if it came to it. I get the impression that half of the reason that people want independence is to spite the English which I don't think is really a valid reason. We don't really have the economy for it any more either, maybe 20 years ago when Scotland could have claimed huge amounts of oil in the North Sea. On the plus side being an English speaking country in the Euro could have a lot of economic benefits, as Ireland has seen. Quote
danim Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I think independence is a very bad idea for Scotland as most of our money comes from the British government so we would lose money, also have you seen how the borders going to look, if we go independent we lose the oil fields and the navy and the air force plus making it harder for tourists coming to Scotland which is our second biggest earner Quote
Mr Man Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 The North Sea oil would technical be under Scottish territory meaning the British (or English Welsh) Government would have to buy them from Scotland. And why would Scotland need an armed forces? Quote
danim Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I managed to view a set of maps when independence was first suggested a nd the way the border was shown it went diagonally upwards so a couple of the oil fields were on England's side and they were official. I do not know how the border sits on the discussion now nut the oil will have a large factor on the positioning. Also in reply to zed0, the euro is going the way of the sixpence and halfpenny. The euro has failed hugely and that comes from an interview by the inventor of the euro Quote
Mr Man Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Even if a yes is voted within 5 years it'll take until at least 2035 to sort out all the legal ramifications of the oil fields. Still a trade flow between an independent Scotland and England will generate more money than the subsidisation vs tax it generates now. Quote
Saruman the White Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I think independence is a very bad idea for Scotland as most of our money comes from the British government so we would lose money, also have you seen how the borders going to look, if we go independent we lose the oil fields and the navy and the air force plus making it harder for tourists coming to Scotland which is our second biggest earner I agree and it would be such a shame considering all that the Uk has achieved in history because of each individual countries input e.g wars. The union jack will look like this if Scotland leave I prefer the flag as it is now. Quote
Mr Man Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I agree and it would be such a shame considering all that the Uk has achieved in history because of each individual countries input e.g wars. The union jack will look like this if Scotland leave *Snip* I prefer the flag as it is now. That's the union FLAG not JACK . And if Scotland leaves the union the cross of saint Patric (the red salter) will most likly be removed as well, meaning a new English Welsh Union Flag will probably be designed. Quote
Saruman the White Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 That's the union FLAG not JACK . And if Scotland leaves the union the cross of saint Patric (the red salter) will most likly be removed as well, meaning a new English Welsh Union Flag will probably be designed. Union Jack is another name for the union flag and if a new flag is designed it would a English, Welsh and Northern Irish design. Quote
ADHO15 Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Union Jack is another name for the union flag and if a new flag is designed it would a English, Welsh and Northern Irish design. It's only the Union Jack when it's on a ship, otherwise it's the Union Flag. Quote
danim Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 ADHO5 is correct the Union Flag is only known as the union jack when it is flown from the jack staff of a ship. Saruman the White The new flag would probably look like this UnionFlag without Scotland by danim007, on Flickr or this Union_Flag_of_UK_with_Wales_Without_Scotland by danim007, on Flickr Quote
Mr Man Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 The new flag would probably look like this Most likely the Crosses of St George and David (A yellow cross on a black background) or the cross of St George with a dragon in the middle. I certain they would drop the Cross of St Patrick as it's not really a symbol of NI (which should be returned to Ireland before Scotland is independent). Quote
Saruman the White Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Most likely the Crosses of St George and David (A yellow cross on a black background) or the cross of St George with a dragon in the middle. I certain they would drop the Cross of St Patrick as it's not really a symbol of NI (which should be returned to Ireland before Scotland is independent). Northern Ireland should not go back to ireland as most of the citizens want to be in the UK. And only 29% of Scott's want independence. We should have more support for the union Quote
Mr Man Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 Northern Ireland should not go back to ireland as most of the citizens want to be in the UK. Not for long. Quote
Mr Man Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 Why? Because recently NI opinion polls are growing to favour the United Ireland opinion, still behind the Split Ireland option but growing. Quote
Jargo Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 England will never give Northern Ireland back to the Irish. Not while there's still oil and gas in the Irish sea. In the same way England will never give up North sea oil and gas to the Scottish. No matter what Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond says. In all the wrangling over Independence compromise will be made but England is too stubborn to let go of important assets unless there's buggar all left. It's the same with the Falklands. There's actually no real oil deposits there but England is just too stubborn to let Argentina have the islands back. At least, while we have a strong Conservative voice in government. In ten years of test drilling no significant oil field has been found in the Falklands. The current government is technically inciting Argentina to declare war so there's a rematch. The middle east has been a damp squib and every Prime Minister wants a victory. Especially a conservative one. Plus a war means lots of people joining the armed forces so unemployment figures go down. War gives Joe Public a distraction from the subterfuges of government policy and dictate. War provides justification for tax rises and budget cuts. It's essentially a carbon copy of Thatcher's era. With some stolen Blair ideas. Unfortunately the current cabinet is mostly made up of buffoons and airheads. William Jefferson Hague has proved he couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery. He's our Foreign secretary and First Secretary of State and he hasn't a clue. George Gideon Oliver Osborne is intent on a return to the feudal system of the middle ages. Andrew David Lansley is destroying the NHS. Theresa Mary May seems to spend most of her time shopping for hideous sci-fi inspired clothing and apologising for foul-ups on her watch. It's a terrible hollow joke. The fact is that the notion of empire still smothers our chances of progress. The church of England and the monarchy get in the way of progress. The idiots in Whitehall get in the way of progress. We can't become a properly functioning nation unless things change radically. First ad foremost among the changes needed is giving the British public a say. We elect these morons to office and then suddenly we're cut off from the process. There needs to be a process of referendum on all important issues. This is our lives and welfare, it's only right we should have a say. The kingdom is founded on the right to free speech and freedom of choice yet there really isn't any freedom. David William Donald Cameron's big society is just a way of absolving responsibility not giving people choice and empowering them. It's a sly cost cutting exercise. Joe Public can't afford to run the big society. The only people who can are the rich, like Cameron and his chums. He talks about knuckling down and accepting austerity yet he's a multi-millionaire who will never feel the pinch and punch of austerity. Joe Public needs to start saying No, enough of the crap and bare faced lies. If you want to stay in your job then we want to be heard and included in the decision making. We don't live in the 1940's any more though Cameron seems to think so. And he's no Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill or Clement Richard Attlee either. He and his cronies are Muppets doing a terrible job of impersonating real politicians. They don't deserve the jobs. This has been an ill-informed post on the behalf of the grumpy old man party. Quote
tedbeard Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 England is just too stubborn to let Argentina have the islands back. "Back"? They have never been part of Argentina so they cannot give them "back". That would be like saying we should give Ontario "back" to the United States who briefly occupied it in the War of 1812. Quote
Mr Man Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 *Gratuitous use of full names* I agree with almost everything here. Sorry make that everything. You standing for MP Brickenhead-town-dweller . "Back"? They have never been part of Argentina so they cannot give them "back". Even so, the point is geographically they are part of Argentina's, it would be like saying the Isle of Mann should be independent if Australia gives it up because even though it's in English waters they have no claim over it. NB: Australia has no claim over the Isle of Mann (I was just too lazy to think of a RL example). Quote
Jargo Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 "Back"? They have never been part of Argentina so they cannot give them "back". That would be like saying we should give Ontario "back" to the United States who briefly occupied it in the War of 1812. Ok, 'England is too stubborn to let the islands go'. You knew what I meant though and you're just being nit-picky and pedantic. Mr Man, I haven't got the patience. Instead I've got my eye on a useless barren chunk of china. I'll go and stick a British flag in it and then when the Chinese complain I'll claim it was always ours and any natural resources belong to the UK. Then when China tries to evict me the armed forces can come and have a silly little war conflict. It'll be great for the Government and the BBC and Daily Mail readers. Even better for flag manufacturers. Britain always looks so cheery with St George cross bunting strung up everywhere. We'll be able to put a pink bit back on the maps. Quote
Hrw-Amen Posted March 18, 2012 Posted March 18, 2012 I am no politician, but surely the whole thing is that the residents of the islands do not want to be part of Argentina, or of anywhere else other than the UK. That is what counts as far as I can see. If all the or most of the population suddenly decided for whatever reason that being with Argentina was better for them than being with the UK, then I am sure most of the public in the UK would support them with that. But they do not, so we don’t. I don’t know much about the oil industry either, but common sense would tell us that the south Atlantic is for a big part at least adjacent to south America and as such parts of Argentina. Obviously parts of it are connected to and surrounding the Falklands as well. Why can’t there be some negotiated settlement to allow both parties access to some of this if it is indeed there. Surely it would make economic sense for that to happen rather than have some military standoff and possibly conflict that neither side probably wants or can afford? (Apart from maybe a couple of politicians on either side looking to make a name for themselves historically.) I am pretty sure that most people in Argentina are no more warmongers than most people in the UK or the Falklands, so it would seem that a peaceful settlement over the oil issue with the islanders wishes taken into account as the most important thing should be the way forwards. Quote
Jedi master Brick Posted March 26, 2012 Author Posted March 26, 2012 Finally summer seems to be here . Yes, it seems we skipped spring . Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.