Mr.Nice Guy wrote: » It's not silly at all. The UK and unionists were content to see Ireland as the national unit when they were getting their way, e.g. when denying Home Rule despite the clear majority of the island wanting it for decades. As soon as it became clear that the same rules which denied Home Rule were going to pave the way for it, unionists, aided by their friends in London, did as they so often do and changed the goalposts, insisting partition was now necessary, and threatening violence. That is how NI was born. We're now starting to see similar mischievous talk being applied to the Scottish independence debate, with articles on how the Shetlands might continue under Westminster rule. Classic divide and conquer tactics from the Tories.
View wrote: » Again that doesn’t alter the fact that every political boundary on the planet is an artificial creation/entity. One could just as easily argue - and historical our self styled “republicans” did argue - that the Irish Free State/Republic of Ireland were/are artificial creations but that doesn’t alter the fact that such an artificial creation happened, nor does it mean that a majority here would rush to the polls today to abolish the “artificial creation” that is Ireland. And equally the same applies in NI today since, despite the decades since its creation - be that “artificial” or not - and despite a fair few political shocks during that time such as Brexit, there is no indication that a majority there would be willing to vote to end its existence.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » I wonder how much fishing waters would come with the Shetlands.
Water John wrote: By your logic none of the ex Yugoslavia countries would be viable.
Markcheese wrote: » 200 mile limit except where it clashes with someone else ? ,a lot of shetland islanders don't particularly see themselves as being scottish ... So why would they want to change distant rule from westminster ( which has been good for them ) to distant rule from edinburg ?( Which is uncertain ), It could even benefit them to stay with the uk , especially if they hold on to ",their waters "
First Up wrote: » Some of them are very evidently not viable.
BonnieSituation wrote: Go on...
First Up wrote: » OK - you asked. Kosovo was an Albanian ethnic enclave in Yugoslavia and then Serbia. It is now an independent state, based on nothing more than ethnicity, and with a religious (Muslim) distinction from (Orthodox) Serbia. Kosovo's secession from Serbia was bloody and brutal and needed NATO to end it. But whatever the wrongs it suffered, Kosovo is an utterly hopeless economic basket case, surviving largely on foreign aid and remittances from the many Kosovar and Albanian emigrants in Western Europe. Bosnia and Herzegovina is an unhappy mix of Muslim Bosniaks, Orthodox Serbs and Catholic Croats, with a legacy back to WE2. It was created in bloodshed and operates under an artificial system of government that makes Stormont look good. It tries to help its pitifully small economy by imposing barriers (10k queues of trucks at the Serbian border are the norm). No chance of breaking the cycle until they can agree internally and not much sign of that. Montenegro's separation from Serbia was a late (and misguided) development. A pretty little country but far to small to maintain all the instruments needed for modern government and with industries too small to compete with big brother Serbia - or anyone else. It is desperately seeking shelter in the EU - the government hoping for financial support and the populace hoping for EU passports. Macedonia (now North Macedonia) is another tiny and uncomfortable mix of Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Serbs and a few others. A few small industries that were orphaned by the break up of Yugoslavia and without the international network, local expertise or foreign investment to kick start the stagnant economy. Only Croatia (who escaped early and were taken in by the EU with Italy's help) and Serbia (always the strongest and most cohesive part of Yugoslavia) are in any kind of shape. If anyone wants to see the dark side of ethnic nationalism, look at the former Yugoslavia
BonnieSituation wrote: And Slovenia while you're at it?
First Up wrote: » Yes, my mistake. Actually, Slovenia was the first out (and helped into the EU with Italy's help). Croatia followed a similar path a bit later. It was always attached to Western Europe, Germany in particular and more efficient (and less corrupt) than the others.
Water John wrote: » A bit outside the thread but Yugoslavia was a false construct of Tito, wasn't going to hold together.
Drawing on official figures for an area of 127,000 km2 around Shetland, bounded by Faroese, Norwegian and the remainder of UK waters, Dr Napier calculated that local vessels landed 14 per cent of the fish and shellfish by weight and 21 per cent by value. ... In all, 450,000 tonnes of fish and shellfish worth £370m was landed from the “Shetland EEZ” by UK and EU boats annually from 2016 to 2018. On average, Shetland boats landed 120,000 tonnes worth £116m, 63,000 tonnes and £77m of which was caught in the “Shetland EEZ”. Pelagic fish dominated catches – four fifths (79 per cent) by weight and more than half (58 per cent) by value, with demersal fish accounting for 18 per cent by weight and 38 per cent by value. The “Shetland EEZ” accounts for 17 per cent of the UK EEZ and just over a quarter (27 per cent) of the Scottish part of the UK EEZ.
BonnieSituation wrote: So none of the FYR's are viable in your mind, except Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia cos reasons?
BonnieSituation wrote: And creeping out from their former status as constituent republics of a federal State that had a massive civil war... imagine the cheek of them seeking assistance and possible EU help to strengthen their economies to solidify their independene and improve their quality of life.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Good thing you're here as I haven't watched or read any news since 1991.:rolleyes: --- So none of the FYR's are viable in your mind, except Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia cos reasons? And creeping out from their former status as constituent republics of a federal State that had a massive civil war... imagine the cheek of them seeking assistance and possible EU help to strengthen their economies to solidify their independene and improve their quality of life.
peter kern wrote: almost 10 % of the croatian population immingrated in 2019, not sure if that is a sign of a country that does well ?
Water John wrote: A bit outside the thread but Yugoslavia was a false construct of Tito, wasn't going to hold together.
Update on Peoples Action on Section 30 By now, most of you will have heard about the formal backing of the case by MP's Angus MacNeil and Kenny McKaskill in the form of affidavits filed with the court on Friday. I need to start by offering an apology. An email was scheduled to go out to you minutes before it going to the press and social media. That email didn't go out (not sure why) which is why this will be the first time you've had an email after the fact. If you're not familiar with what has happened then you can read the full article in the National Here The long and the short of it is simple - the UK Government and the Lord Advocate have continued to pursue the line of this case being ordinary citizens who don't have the right to "stand in the shoes of parliamentarians". However, with the filing of these affidavits we now have parliamentarians effectively saying "sure! stand in our shoes if you like", supporting the right of the electorate to ask, and have answered, questions of law on the constitutional question. That and: "Hey! We'd also really like an answer to this question!" Hopefully, now that Angus and Kenny have stuck their heads up and gone over the top first, we're hoping that it might make other MP's and MSP's brave enough to do the same, and certainly supporters of the case to go to their elected representatives and say: "Hey! Come and Join us!" As a reminder, we also have the hearing on Tuesday over production of documents and if you would like to monitor that hearing (Tuesday 12th of January, Court of Session, Virtual Hearings, 9.30AM) then all you have to do is contact the Clerk of the Outer House of the Court of Session and they will give you details to listen in. We're still on course for the hearing on the 21st and 22nd (the big one). I should have more news for you later in the week and as always I will update you as things progress. I hope you are all safe and well. Martin Keatings
CelticRambler wrote: » There was an article linked on this thread (I think) in the latter half of last year that explained how the elections in May could be run in Scotland on the basis of a mandate for independence, and if the [SNP] were to achieve a thumping majority, they would have the legal basis to declare independence without seeking Westminster's approval. Those elections in May will coincide with a hell of a lot of fishermen coming to the end of their cash reserves, and a hell of a lot of seed potato exporters having to decide whether or not to plant crops for the year ahead, and they will know that it was Boris Johnson's Brexit that put them in that situation. No doubt there will be many other groups across the population who begin to feel the full effect of Brexit as the weather warms up and Covid dies down. While it's probably still a bit early for Brexit to have wreaked as much havoc on the Scottish economy as it has the potential to do, I would also say that these elections are probably the perfect time for the SNP to run a campaign on the back of seeking a formal mandate for (unilaterally declaring) independence. And if the Tories run against that, well ... :P
peter kern wrote: » why would people think that an independent scotland is such a no brainer debt paymets to uk when leaving risk losing oakney and shetland. ecconnomy, who do they trade with while out of uk and not in eu. joining eu going to take 5/6 years but given the state the economy is it could take longer the currency issue no way could they keep the scotish pound and only 20 % of scots wanted the euro. while in the long term likley beneficial thats at least 15 en 20 years until they would se benefits. the irish way off leaving would be very hasty. as we always said brexit during covid was stupid ...
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » There is a lot of cheerleading for Scottish independence around here. If we think the UK uncoupling a 50 odd year relationship with Europe was tough the uncoupling of a 400 odd year relationship between Scotland and the rest of the UK would be a nightmare. And all the proponents of independence will fall into the same traps as the Brexiteers, promising their own version of sunlit uplands and unicorns. If the Scots want independence then that's their decision but don't tell me that it will be easy,and nor will it be good for Ireland.
Seth Brundle wrote: » Out of curiosity, how many border crossings are there between Scotland and England?
There are dozens of roads which cross the border, and nobody is proposing erecting checkpoints on the A1 - or indeed the A74, A68, A7, A697 or even the B6318. There are a decent number of unnamed roads crossing back and forth where the closest thing to border infrastructure is a cattle grid.
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » There is a lot of cheerleading for Scottish independence around here. If we think the UK uncoupling a 50 odd year relationship with Europe was tough the uncoupling of a 400 odd year relationship between Scotland and the rest of the UK would be a nightmare.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e68aa2b0e039b12ade8384a2f42841c6.svg)
