Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scotland starts renewed case for independence

gov.scot

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 745 posts

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#701

Post by maratc »

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #400
modo_mario wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subsidise their own defence? Defence from what? The only time NATO called the arms was when the US invoked article 5. Additionally this article is from 2007. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/16/iraq.iraqtimel... We are as of today still helping out in Iraq. >but I just found it odd that the U.S. would be lumped in with China When SWIFT was transacting with Iran after our negotiations you forced our hand to…

I mean, has the war in Ukraine not shown that having a strong defense is necessary, even in Europe? If you're trying to point out that there hasn't been a war in the EU while it's been under America's security cordon, point well made. Point taken on Iran, I understand that was annoying from the EU perspective and potentially an overplay of America's hand; but I guess I just think that if the EU and the U.S. aren't ti…

> I mean, has the war in Ukraine not shown that having a strong defense is necessary, even in Europe?

In 2008 NATO Summit in Bucharest, NATO declared that Ukraine (and Georgia) will one day become a part of NATO. I read that France and Germany were against that decision for the fear of enraging Russia, but the US forced their opinion. Russia was enraged, and this is how we got to this war. My take from this war is that it's not always a good thing to let US orchestrate the security interests of Europe. Without US forcing their way through that summit, we might not have a war in Europe today.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#702

Post by happy_path »

netsharc wrote: post #277
happy_path wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spain will only veto Scotland if the independence is not agreed between the UK and Scotland (in the same spirit of Spain's opinion of Kosovo independence). Spain parliament is against unilateral declarations of independence.

> Spain parliament is against unilateral declarations of independence. For background, it's because the Spanish government is afraid that recognizing independence movements legitimizes the Catalonian independence movement in their own country.

It's not only that. After the Civil War and Franco's regime, Spain's political tradition is to avoid conflict and wars at all cost.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#703

Post by happy_path »

ericmay wrote: post #313
happy_path wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spain will only veto Scotland if the independence is not agreed between the UK and Scotland (in the same spirit of Spain's opinion of Kosovo independence). Spain parliament is against unilateral declarations of independence.

> Spain parliament is against unilateral declarations of independence. Very convenient of them isn’t it?

Aren't they allowed to have an opinion?

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#704

Post by easytiger »

Xylakant wrote: post #395
easytiger wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is concerning and a misunderstanding of human and geopolitical behaviour. Once some of the EUs more insane policies are forced on countries the desire to leave will spread. > Veto rule is no way to govern a large group, since you only have to bribe a single member to cripple the whole. Are you saying there is a corruption issue right now? With majority rule (size TBD) a handful of countries will ride rou…

> With majority rule (size TBD) a handful of countries will ride roughshod over others. Enjoy centrally set tax rates The currently discussed quorum is 55% of the EU countries representing at least 65% of the EU population. There's a neat voting calculator here https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/council-eu/voting-system/... where you can figure out how majorities could work or be blocked. It's a pretty reasonable vot…

That's the point. It wants to set taxes and has made moves in the past even with veto.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#705

Post by sofixa »

refurb wrote: post #664
sofixa wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dirty money in the tens/hundreds of billions doesn't infer interference? Including sizeable donations to the Conservative party? https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/12/world/europe/russian-mone...

Hardly proof of Russian control.

So we've moved the goalposts from "Russia boogeyman" to "you can't prove Russia controls everything", which nobody is claiming.

Russia is involved and dangerous.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#706

Post by [deleted] »

brigandish wrote: post #677
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nouvelle-Calédonie/Kanak (3 times in the last decade), Scotland, Catalonia are the ones I had in mind, thus the 2-3 . I was not aware of Venice's one, so make that 2-4. I am sure there are others, considering my area of knowledge is limited to western european countries.

I mentioned Catalonia's, it was not legitimate or recognised by Spain. I sympathise with their movement but it's not relevant here, anymore than if I hold a vote in my bedroom to set up my own state. Nouvelle-Calédonie is in the Pacific, not Europe, but I'll give you that one because it makes your argument look like a giant stretch. > I am sure there are others Forgive me, but are you expecting me to take you serious…

[deleted]

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#707

Post by mAritz »

physicsguy wrote: post #690
mAritz wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've had those things as the country of Scotland under the UK, so I'd assume you could argue that they qualify with that.

How? There is a well established separate court system in Scotland so I think that part would be fine. But pretty much every other part of government would have to be built from scratch. A foreign office, a home office, immigration, passport office, etc. etc. etc. Most of these are institutions are based physically in rUK so it’s not like they can be “split”

Sure, they'd have to build up new offices and staff them with people. But they have a parliament and they have elections, right?

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#708

Post by scott_w »

mantas wrote: post #688
scott_w wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s easy to prove me wrong: point me to the relevant lines in the relevant treaties or conventions that state this. You can’t because they don’t exist. There is no obligation to seek asylum in the “first safe country.” This is a common trope trotted out by right-wing mouthpieces which is where I’m assuming you got the rest of your “facts.”

If you cross border illegally and don't ask for asylum, then you're, well, illegally crossing the border. For EU, there's Dublin agreement.

Quote or reference the lines in the Dublin agreement that state this. Also, point out where IN U.K. LAW the Dublin agreement and these lines apply.

Your first sentence is irrelevant because this applies to refugees claiming asylum.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#709

Post by justin66 »

brigandish wrote: post #678
justin66 wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I will work to spoil it You've failed to communicate the why? of this. I can express it a different way: you have decided that you know what is best for yourself and your country regarding independence - a big and highly consequential topic - and you're going to act in opposition of that to spite a relatively small number of powerful people whose actions you disapprove of. Those powerful people will not suffer rega…

> You've failed to communicate the why? of this. Because I'm against lying, and because their own statement contained the logic that it's bad to continually vote on this issue - I'm using their ostensibly given logic because, if we take their actual words as truthful, they are correct. Most people agreed at the time and it was one of the reasons they convinced the public to go along with a referendum. Usually I can't…

The idiom about cutting off your nose to spite your face comes to mind.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#710

Post by lbschenkel »

iso1631 wrote: post #607
closewith wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd have the opposite view. It seems unlikely that the bloc will ever provide opt-outs going forward given the difficulties they've caused to date.

Unlike Denmark, Sweden doesn't have an optout for the Euro, yet hasn't joined.

They used a loophole: to adopt Euro you need to be in ERM-II for a while as a pre-requisite, and Sweden found out that there is no rule imposing a timeframe for it to join ERM-II so it is deliberately not joining. IMO this is complying with the letter of the agreement it has with the EU but not the spirit.

As far as I understand, the EU closed this loophole for new members but it is turning a blind eye for Sweden.

It is fascinating to me that in practice there is this reversal of roles: Sweden is supposed to adopt the Euro and yet has a free-floating currency, and Denmark that has an opt-out deliberately chose to be in ERM-II and has a currency that is pegged to the Euro.

Post reply on HN