Rock on, Rockall! (it's back)

janfebmar

Deleted User wrote: »

Considering it's disputed territories it's going to be messy. Scotland may see it as a fisheries issue. Ireland not so much.

Cannot really see why it should be disputed when (a) it is closer to them, (b) they owned it before we could ever have an intetest in it (c) they had inhabitants on it, albeit for only months at a time

fryup

Stanford wrote: »

I feel a Christy Moore song coming on

oh no, thats all we need

blinding

Wasn’t Ray D’arcy going to leave Ireland if Enda Kenny became Taoiseach .

The bloody least he can do is spend 6 months on Rockall .

janfebmar

janfebmar wrote: »

Cannot really see why it should be disputed when (a) it is closer to them, (b) they owned it before we could ever have an intetest in it (c) they had inhabitants on it, albeit for only months at a time

How do they own it ? They say dibs first?

janfebmar

Deleted User wrote: »

How do they own it

They put the flag on it before Mary Lou thought of paddling out to it in a rubber boat.

janfebmar

janfebmar wrote: »

They put the flag on it before Mary Lou thought of paddling out to it in a rubber boat.

Flags have been put down in the artic as well. What does the U.N. say about it?

Edit... "British imperial ambitions were set back by international ratification of the UN convention on the law of the sea (Unclos) in 1982, which states that: “Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/who-owns-rockall-a-history-of-disputes-over-a-tiny-atlantic-island-1.3919668

Far from clear cut. So, while your assertion the disputed area is British, I'm inclined to disagree.

its_steve116

Phileas Frog wrote: »

Then Scotland is bollixed.

No, it's bollocksed.

janfebmar

Deleted User wrote: »

Flags have been out down in the artic as well. What does the U.N. say about it?

The same as Achill was claimed by Mayo, Rockall was claimed by Britain long before the UN was thought of.

janfebmar

janfebmar wrote: »

The same as Achill was claimed by Mayo, Rockall was claimed by Britain long before the UN was thought of.

Did you read the article? The UK submitted its claim in 2009. The EU was around before that I'm sure.

Achasanai

Achasanai wrote: »

It's closer to Scotland than Ireland. And as far as I know, both Scotland and Ireland have a claim on it.

Iceland and the Faroes do also.

My solution: have a few non-EU asylum seekers give birth in the waters off Rockall. The Brits and the Scots will quickly drop away, and the islet (and its gas) shall be ours! ours! ours!

janfebmar

Deleted User wrote: »

Did you read the article? The UK submitted its claim in 2009. The EU was around before that I'm sure.

Actually the UK submitted it's claim on Rockall in 1955. They were navigating around it long before that though.

janfebmar

janfebmar wrote: »

Actually the UK submitted it's claim on Rockall in 1955.

And how did that go for them. Was it recognised by any other country?

janfebmar wrote: »

They were navigating around it long before that though.

Pretty much all navigated around it, bumping into it wouldn't have been very clever.

blinding

Deleted User wrote: »

And how did that go for them. Was it recognised by any other country?






Pretty much all navigated around it, bumping into it wouldn't have been very clever.

I wouldn’t trust that Rock . Maybe its moving about !

janfebmar

blinding wrote: »

I wouldn’t trust that Rock . Maybe its moving about !

If you stare at it long enough it will move. It would be great for the tourism industry out there if it did.:D

fly_agaric

The Empire on which the sun never sets reduced to squabbles over a freezing guano covered rock in the ocean where its probably dark by 4pm in December!

bear1

I'd be curious of the government's reaction here if the UK navy seized some of the Irish boats.
It Would be some show if one of our own navy ships were sent to the vicinity as a precaution

blinding

Would there be anything to be said for Blowing it Up ?

Ruraldweller56

blinding wrote: »

Wasn’t Ray D’arcy going to leave Ireland if Enda Kenny became Taoiseach .

The bloody least he can do is spend 6 months on Rockall .

He was. To a stirring round of applause.

janfebmar

bear1 wrote: »

I'd be curious of the government's reaction here if the UK navy seized some of the Irish boats.

Back in February two Northern Ireland-registered vessels were detained by the Irish Naval Service in Dundalk bay and were impounded at nearby Clogherhead port. So one good turn deserves another.

Hamsterchops

bear1 wrote: »

I'd be curious of the government's reaction here if the UK navy seized some of the Irish boats.
It Would be some show if one of our own navy ships were sent to the vicinity as a precaution

Next 48 hours should be very telling ........
Specially if the Irish trawlers refuse to leave the 12 mile zone!

Tuco88

Relax we have the Zee Germans with us this time...

We should be crackin out U-Boats at a ferocious rate...

Feckin Iron bru... Tanora is where its at...

steddyeddy

janfebmar wrote: »

The same as Achill was claimed by Mayo, Rockall was claimed by Britain long before the UN was thought of.

Are you sure you're not a Sinn Fein plant?

Hamsterchops

Tuco88 wrote: »

Relax we have the Zee Germans with us this time...

We should be crackin out U-Boats at a ferocious rate...

Feckin Iron bru... Tanora is where its at...

wonder will the scottish administration apply to the London lord mayor to "borrow" hms Belfast from its birth on the thames, so that it can take part in some target practice in the north sea

HMS belfast has big guns.

YFlyer

Are fish population more concentrated in that area of the North Sea?

fly_agaric

fly_agaric wrote: »

The Empire on which the sun never sets reduced to squabbles over a freezing guano covered rock in the ocean where its probably dark by 4pm in December!

In fairness, this isn't news in the UK. And the Irish media have either ignored some pertinent facts, or have relegated them to the end of their articles, as though it was irrelevant that there has been an increased Irish presence there recently, or as if the arguments by the Scottish Fishermens' Federation are minor elements of the story. They are not.

I'm as patriotic as the next man, but the Scots have a valid argument here. I'm not convinced that we do.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm as patriotic as the next man, but the Scots have a valid argument here. I'm not convinced that we do.

Why TF should we respect a 12 mile radius around a bloody stump hundreds of miles away from land. It's bat shít crazy of the scots to think that.

Tuco88

Tuco88 wrote: »

Relax we have the Zee Germans with us this time...

I'd doubt that.

The Germans were willing to use the backstop because it had a direct and unambiguous ramification for their own trade with the UK.

Rockall is 450-odd square miles of empty seas, it is meaningless to everyone except the fishermen involved.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Why TF should we respect a 12 mile radius around a bloody stump hundreds of miles away from land. It's bat shít crazy of the scots to think that.

We'd be demanding respect if it were our clump of rock, which it is not.

_blaaz

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'd doubt that.

The Germans were willing to use the backstop because it had a direct and unambiguous ramification for their own trade with the UK.

Rockall is 450-odd square miles of empty seas, it is meaningless to everyone except the fishermen involved.

Was always under impression its whats under the sea there vs whats in the sea is the source of conflict there

_blaaz

_blaaz wrote: »

Was always under impression its whats under the sea there vs whats in the sea is the source of conflict there

You taking about fossil fuels? Yeah, that's important here, but we're not claiming sovereignty anyway (nor have we any right to), so even on that point, the benefits are dubious.