Poll: 48% of English oppose Scottish independence

Almost half of people in England do not want Scotland to become independent, the BBC reported, quoting the results of an opinion poll.

B92

That is interesting.The English political classes and their mouthpiece Murdoch’s press that have been muttering about the sponging Scots needing disproportionate funding for so long are suddenly appearing reluctant to to allow their troublesome neighbour breaking free from the British Empire.

However such posts in the English press which state that Scots will only survive because of the handouts they receive from England are nonsense and only serve to strengthen the resolve of the Scottish people.If one takes into consideration that 80% of North Sea oil lies in Scottish waters then one wonders whether the handouts are in fact the other way round.

I do have a feeling that things will get even nastier as the date of the Referendum looms closer.One has to look at history of the UK-Northern Ireland is a good example-and one will see that Scottish Independence will not depend upon the will of the Scottish people.

The UK played a key role, firstly in the breakup of Yugoslavia, and then in the bombing and partitioning of Serbia in order to accommodate violent Albanian separatists. London unashamedly continues to sponsor the fake gangster statelet of ‘kosova’ on Serbian soil. The English are really not in a position to begrudge the Scottish people’s right to self determination. After all, Scotland is not England’s ‘Jerusalem’. But wait until the Islamic Republic of Bradfordistan is declared; and then maybe, just maybe, the English will get a sense of how Serbians feel.

I find this very strange. Most English people have no problem with the Scots and would wish them well if they became independent.

Th population of the UK is too big and breaking it down into smaller chunks would possibly help.

Doesnt matter, unilateral independence is allowed, England said so in 2008

One things for sure though: if the split does thappen there will be no murders, no concentration camps and no war criminals for us to put on t-shirts. Sorry to disappoint you, but this is how great civilisations work.
(The Brit, 5 July 2011 16:09)
--
It has less to do with great civilisations and more to do with ethnic purity. You don't have a large English minority living in Wales and Scotland who want to remain within the UK. Neither side fought with the NAZIs nor did they commit genocide against English minorities. You won't get Germany prematurely recognising either state and allowing unresolved issues to cause instability.

Now, when it comes to N.Ireland, I'm not sure how your great civilisation fits in there. That situation comes closer to the conflicts in Yugoslavia. Imagine the Catholics unilaterally declaring independence without the support of the Protestants and the Vatican immediately recognising it and pressuring other UN members to do the same.

The external Western meddling in the former YU contributed greatly to the instability.

Personally I see no real point in Scottish independence.
Speaking as a citizen of the UK - I hope that the people of Scotland (my fellow citizens) will value our union and will seek to preserve it.
(R, 5 July 2011 05:11)

Maybe you don't but I hope that Scotland leave Great Britain followed closely by Northern Ireland, then you can call Wales and England "Great Britain" if you like.

Now Lenny, dear friend. You've come up with this "Scottish" oil thing before and it's complete nonsense. The people of Shetland, in whose waters the remaining oil is to be found, are culturally Scandinavian and do not associate themselves with Scotland, as you'd know had you ever met one. If Scotland decides to become a sort of wind-swept Greece (and they've only to look across the water at Ireland to see what a bad idea that is), Shetland and Orkney will vote as they always do, to remain alligned with London. Even if they decided to go it alone themselves, Edinburgh isn't going to get its theiving hands on the oil.
(The Brit, 4 July 2011 20:46)

I would recommend you to read the International Sea Law which ,as i understand,has been ratified by the uk government and you will see who owns the North Sea oil.I also understand the SNP has campaigned in past uk general elections using the slogan of oil as a platform for Scottish independence.

Now Greece has got nothing to do with Scottish independence but for some reason you brought it up again.But let me repeat again that had it not been for the wizard of oz Melvin King and his magic wand that created £ 1 trillion on his computer screen and saddling each household in uk with £50000 debt(that's only the banks bailout) you wouldn't be posting about Greece.

The Brit, 4 July 2011 20:46)

What’s good for the goosed is good for the gander, mate. The UK presided over the break up of the old Yugo and now we Serbs are going to preside over the break up of the so called Great Britain. When you are a multi ethnic nation busting you guys up is going to be easy as pie.

I’m going to enjoy this one.

Doesnt matter, unilateral independence is allowed, England said so in 2008
(New Zealander, 4 July 2011 20:14)

So England said unilateral independence is allowed when a Scottish Prime Minister of the United Kingdom decided to recognise Kosovo?

You're not making any sense.

I would have thought that "52% of English people couldn't give one if Scotland went tomorrow" would have made a more interesting headline.

Now Lenny, dear friend. You've come up with this "Scottish" oil thing before and it's complete nonsense. The people of Shetland, in whose waters the remaining oil is to be found, are culturally Scandinavian and do not associate themselves with Scotland, as you'd know had you ever met one. If Scotland decides to become a sort of wind-swept Greece (and they've only to look across the water at Ireland to see what a bad idea that is), Shetland and Orkney will vote as they always do, to remain alligned with London. Even if they decided to go it alone themselves, Edinburgh isn't going to get its theiving hands on the oil.

Brit,
as I understand it, it is irrelevant what these peoples of the shetlands want. they are not a member of the uk, but a region within scotland. scotland can legally declare udi without a problem, but a subset of scoland cannot.
or is it that n.mitro region, who would prefer to stay with serbia can delcare themselves independent from kosovo, or rs from bosnia or presevo from serbia?
udi is okay upto state/provincial level but not deeper than that.

so... oil stays with scotland, shetlanders can leave for england if they wish, or live in free scotland.

Whatever happens with Scotland, let it be clear that there is no malice between the England and Scotland. This is not Yugoslavia. There is no fighting and no murder - neither will there ever be need for it or argument for it.

Comparisons with the breakdown of Yugoslavia are fatuous.

It is not the Scots who get to decide on independence - it is the people who live in Scotland of whatever ethnicity. Scotland is not owned by the Scots - it is owned by the people who live in Scotland of whatever ethnicity they may be. While there is a pride in being Scottish - it should be noted that many Scots live well beyond the Scottish borders. They may be Scots, but they will not get a vote.

The relations between Scotland and England are on the most friendly of terms. Further, as Scotland is (and will most likely remain) with the EU, it has open borders - so the people of England will have as much right to go and live there as they do currently.

Personally I see no real point in Scottish independence. It won't make things fundamentally different for the people of Scotland. The UK functions well for all of the people in it - the kind of narrow nationalism that motivates some people is actually an insult to the others who are well integrated and do not share that feeling of selfish isolationism.

Speaking as a citizen of the UK - I hope that the people of Scotland (my fellow citizens) will value our union and will seek to preserve it.

Th population of the UK is too big and breaking it down into smaller chunks would possibly help.
(Andy UK, 4 July 2011 16:45)
--
Actually, there are about 5 million Scots and 50 million English so breaking it up even further means the Scots get a lot more land proportionally while England becomes even more populated with less resources.

Norway is doing extremely well due to its North Sea oil and I suspect Scotland will do the same. This will work well for Scotland but not for England. Once Scotland goes then so will Wales and possibly N.Ireland, which in turn could trigger the break-up of the US of A and EU.

It is eloquently described in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms -> the Dynastic Cycle: “The Empire, long divided, must unite: long united, must divide.”

I think it would be a shame for Scotland to leave the UK however I believe they should be allowed to decide their own future. Also if Scotland is permitted to an official referendum to independence I don't believe England, Northern Ireland and Wales should be allowed to participate in the referendum.

However I really doubt Scotland would say yes in such a referendum, regardless I support their right to an independence referendum.

That is interesting.The English political classes and their mouthpiece Murdoch’s press that have been muttering about the sponging Scots needing disproportionate funding for so long are suddenly appearing reluctant to to allow their troublesome neighbour breaking free from the British Empire.

However such posts in the English press which state that Scots will only survive because of the handouts they receive from England are nonsense and only serve to strengthen the resolve of the Scottish people.If one takes into consideration that 80% of North Sea oil lies in Scottish waters then one wonders whether the handouts are in fact the other way round.
(Leonidas, 4 July 2011 16:15)

Personally I believe that Scotland would survive as an independent country, regardless of the North Sea Oil; if the North Sea Oil didn't exist Scotland would still be a prosperous independent rich country.

Yes 80% of Britain's north sea oil does lie in the waters of the Constituent Country of Scotland. However 80% of Scotland's north sea oil lies in the waters of the Orkney and the Shetlands isles. The people of Orkney and the Shetlands are not ethnically Scottish, they're Scandinavian; they politically feel closer to Westminster than they do to Edinburgh.

Should Orkney and the Shetlands be allowed to decide their own future too? Why should Edinburgh be entitled to the oil of these Scandinavian people north west of mainland Scotland?

Also I find it rather amusing that you talk about the Scots becoming free from the British Empire considering that the Scots were the backbone of the British Empire. Scottish colonisation in the Americas out-dates English colonisation in the Americas, however both colonies came together under the 1707 Acts of Union. Not to mention the thousands of Scottish politicians, Scottish aristocrats and Scottish military officers who played a vital role in colonisation, of course a role they shared with their English brethren. Just think, under who was the British Empire born? Under the Scottish House of Stuart, then this Scottish royal family decided to unite the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland; thus creating the United Kingdom.

There are actually some comparisons to be made to Yugoslavia, but only up to a point. Scotland, and to a lesser extent Wales and Northern Ireland, have made some contribution to the United Kingdom, but they are minor partners, having nowhere near the significance in the Union that Croatia and Slovenia had in SFRJ. Without them, England will still be a country of 60 million, with the best land, the best industry, the best infrastructure. We won't even notice that they've gone. Plus, Bomber Blair's corruption of the Labour Party, only sustained by Scottish parliamentarians (elected with half the number of votes required by their London equivalents), would be out of power forever.

Scotland's passive-aggressive behaviour under Alex Salmond increasingly reminds me of Milo's Montenegro in the SCG period. In the same way that Serbia is a better and more confident country without Montenegro's parasitic behaviour, so maybe would England be without the need to carry its Celtic neighbours. RUS isn't doing so badly without it Soviet "partners" either.

One things for sure though: if the split does thappen there will be no murders, no concentration camps and no war criminals for us to put on t-shirts. Sorry to disappoint you, but this is how great civilisations work.

Oh yeah, and there's as much chance of Yorkshire and Cornwall demanding "independence" from Englans as there is Sumadija seceding from Srbija - pure fantasy.

Poll: 48% of English oppose Scottish independence

Almost half of people in England do not want Scotland to become independent, the BBC reported, quoting the results of an opinion poll.

Comment -

The Scots - Walesians and Irish,
has beem Bullied by the Anglo-Saxians from Northwest Germany for some
Fifteenhundred Years now.

And the Mayority of The Anglosaxians in the Province of Englanf in greater Britonia are probably not over Fifty procent,
their Familynames may give the Answer to that.

Now the English will taste their own beak up,
in a Civil War of their own.

"Wait ans see said the Englishman - Wait and see" !.

Arn.Sweden.

Should Orkney and the Shetlands be allowed to decide their own future too? Why should Edinburgh be entitled to the oil of these Scandinavian people north west of mainland Scotland?
(Ian, UK, 5 July 2011 12:12)
--
You guys are already fracturing the UK with this talk. Why can't these Scandinavians join Norway or Sweden? That's where they belong right?

How about Berwick, can that rejoin Scotland? Check -> http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/2008/02/17/berwick-votes-for-scotland-78057-20321618
How about the Republic of Yorkshire? Check -> http://www.godsowncounty.co.uk/04/yorkshire/yorkshire-independence-movement
How about independence for Cornwall? Check -> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/3632981/Cornish-independence-is-back-on-the-menu.html

We are not only talking about breaking up the UK but England also. You think it is immune to the problems Yugoslavia faced and Serbia faces? You think the "Kosova" precedent could not backfire on the UK? It is normally a good economy that keeps a country glued but when things go wrong then the more wealthier parts break away first followed by the rest.

You never know, you might just experience some very power nations breaking up the UK in your lifetime like the UK, US and Germany did with Yugoslavia.

You guys are already fracturing the UK with this talk. Why can't these Scandinavians join Norway or Sweden? That's where they belong right?

How about Berwick, can that rejoin Scotland? Check -> [link]
How about the Republic of Yorkshire? Check -> [link]
How about independence for Cornwall? Check -> [link]

We are not only talking about breaking up the UK but England also. You think it is immune to the problems Yugoslavia faced and Serbia faces? You think the "Kosova" precedent could not backfire on the UK? It is normally a good economy that keeps a country glued but when things go wrong then the more wealthier parts break away first followed by the rest.

You never know, you might just experience some very power nations breaking up the UK in your lifetime like the UK, US and Germany did with Yugoslavia.
(Zoran, 5 July 2011 14:08)

As a Yorkshireman (born n' bred) and a member of the Yorkshire Ridings Society I would love to see a break up of England. An independent Republic of Jórvík's Shire would suit me well, however I'd personally settle for Yorkshire aka Jórvík's Shire to become a constituent country of the UK/ a British Republic (as most Yorkshirians are Republicans, like mi' sen).

As regards to the Shetlands and Orkney, if they want to rejoin with a Scandinavian country (probably Norway?), then they're well in their right to do so if that is what the masses believe in.

To be honest, I believe this manufactured artificial "Kosova Precedent" could turn out to be quite useful to suit my own political needs and desires.

Now let me end this comment by a famous quote by Sit Bernard Ingham.


"If the Scots can have independence, then in terms of being a viable unit Yorkshire can too. It's larger, it has more population, it has every asset you could need. If we are playing that narrow game, Yorkshire is entitled to independence and its own Parliament. But is that what we want today? It's playing into the hands of those people who want to break up the United Kingdom and let Europe rule the various parts."


YORKSHIRE TILL I DIE!

Independence for Scotland YES!!

Inependence for Yorkshire, oh YES!! We don't want those crooks in London telling us what to do.

The UK played a key role, firstly in the breakup of Yugoslavia, and then in the bombing and partitioning of Serbia in order to accommodate violent Albanian separatists. London unashamedly continues to sponsor the fake gangster statelet of ‘kosova’ on Serbian soil. The English are really not in a position to begrudge the Scottish people’s right to self determination. After all, Scotland is not England’s ‘Jerusalem’. But wait until the Islamic Republic of Bradfordistan is declared; and then maybe, just maybe, the English will get a sense of how Serbians feel.

I would have thought that "52% of English people couldn't give one if Scotland went tomorrow" would have made a more interesting headline.

Now Lenny, dear friend. You've come up with this "Scottish" oil thing before and it's complete nonsense. The people of Shetland, in whose waters the remaining oil is to be found, are culturally Scandinavian and do not associate themselves with Scotland, as you'd know had you ever met one. If Scotland decides to become a sort of wind-swept Greece (and they've only to look across the water at Ireland to see what a bad idea that is), Shetland and Orkney will vote as they always do, to remain alligned with London. Even if they decided to go it alone themselves, Edinburgh isn't going to get its theiving hands on the oil.

Almost half of people in England do not want Scotland to become independent, the BBC reported, quoting the results of an opinion poll.

B92

That is interesting.The English political classes and their mouthpiece Murdoch’s press that have been muttering about the sponging Scots needing disproportionate funding for so long are suddenly appearing reluctant to to allow their troublesome neighbour breaking free from the British Empire.

However such posts in the English press which state that Scots will only survive because of the handouts they receive from England are nonsense and only serve to strengthen the resolve of the Scottish people.If one takes into consideration that 80% of North Sea oil lies in Scottish waters then one wonders whether the handouts are in fact the other way round.

I do have a feeling that things will get even nastier as the date of the Referendum looms closer.One has to look at history of the UK-Northern Ireland is a good example-and one will see that Scottish Independence will not depend upon the will of the Scottish people.

Should Orkney and the Shetlands be allowed to decide their own future too? Why should Edinburgh be entitled to the oil of these Scandinavian people north west of mainland Scotland?
(Ian, UK, 5 July 2011 12:12)
--
You guys are already fracturing the UK with this talk. Why can't these Scandinavians join Norway or Sweden? That's where they belong right?

How about Berwick, can that rejoin Scotland? Check -> http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/2008/02/17/berwick-votes-for-scotland-78057-20321618
How about the Republic of Yorkshire? Check -> http://www.godsowncounty.co.uk/04/yorkshire/yorkshire-independence-movement
How about independence for Cornwall? Check -> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/3632981/Cornish-independence-is-back-on-the-menu.html

We are not only talking about breaking up the UK but England also. You think it is immune to the problems Yugoslavia faced and Serbia faces? You think the "Kosova" precedent could not backfire on the UK? It is normally a good economy that keeps a country glued but when things go wrong then the more wealthier parts break away first followed by the rest.

You never know, you might just experience some very power nations breaking up the UK in your lifetime like the UK, US and Germany did with Yugoslavia.

That is interesting.The English political classes and their mouthpiece Murdoch’s press that have been muttering about the sponging Scots needing disproportionate funding for so long are suddenly appearing reluctant to to allow their troublesome neighbour breaking free from the British Empire.

However such posts in the English press which state that Scots will only survive because of the handouts they receive from England are nonsense and only serve to strengthen the resolve of the Scottish people.If one takes into consideration that 80% of North Sea oil lies in Scottish waters then one wonders whether the handouts are in fact the other way round.
(Leonidas, 4 July 2011 16:15)

Personally I believe that Scotland would survive as an independent country, regardless of the North Sea Oil; if the North Sea Oil didn't exist Scotland would still be a prosperous independent rich country.

Yes 80% of Britain's north sea oil does lie in the waters of the Constituent Country of Scotland. However 80% of Scotland's north sea oil lies in the waters of the Orkney and the Shetlands isles. The people of Orkney and the Shetlands are not ethnically Scottish, they're Scandinavian; they politically feel closer to Westminster than they do to Edinburgh.

Should Orkney and the Shetlands be allowed to decide their own future too? Why should Edinburgh be entitled to the oil of these Scandinavian people north west of mainland Scotland?

Also I find it rather amusing that you talk about the Scots becoming free from the British Empire considering that the Scots were the backbone of the British Empire. Scottish colonisation in the Americas out-dates English colonisation in the Americas, however both colonies came together under the 1707 Acts of Union. Not to mention the thousands of Scottish politicians, Scottish aristocrats and Scottish military officers who played a vital role in colonisation, of course a role they shared with their English brethren. Just think, under who was the British Empire born? Under the Scottish House of Stuart, then this Scottish royal family decided to unite the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland; thus creating the United Kingdom.

Doesnt matter, unilateral independence is allowed, England said so in 2008

The Brit, 4 July 2011 20:46)

What’s good for the goosed is good for the gander, mate. The UK presided over the break up of the old Yugo and now we Serbs are going to preside over the break up of the so called Great Britain. When you are a multi ethnic nation busting you guys up is going to be easy as pie.

I’m going to enjoy this one.

I think it would be a shame for Scotland to leave the UK however I believe they should be allowed to decide their own future. Also if Scotland is permitted to an official referendum to independence I don't believe England, Northern Ireland and Wales should be allowed to participate in the referendum.

However I really doubt Scotland would say yes in such a referendum, regardless I support their right to an independence referendum.

There are actually some comparisons to be made to Yugoslavia, but only up to a point. Scotland, and to a lesser extent Wales and Northern Ireland, have made some contribution to the United Kingdom, but they are minor partners, having nowhere near the significance in the Union that Croatia and Slovenia had in SFRJ. Without them, England will still be a country of 60 million, with the best land, the best industry, the best infrastructure. We won't even notice that they've gone. Plus, Bomber Blair's corruption of the Labour Party, only sustained by Scottish parliamentarians (elected with half the number of votes required by their London equivalents), would be out of power forever.

Scotland's passive-aggressive behaviour under Alex Salmond increasingly reminds me of Milo's Montenegro in the SCG period. In the same way that Serbia is a better and more confident country without Montenegro's parasitic behaviour, so maybe would England be without the need to carry its Celtic neighbours. RUS isn't doing so badly without it Soviet "partners" either.

One things for sure though: if the split does thappen there will be no murders, no concentration camps and no war criminals for us to put on t-shirts. Sorry to disappoint you, but this is how great civilisations work.

Oh yeah, and there's as much chance of Yorkshire and Cornwall demanding "independence" from Englans as there is Sumadija seceding from Srbija - pure fantasy.

One things for sure though: if the split does thappen there will be no murders, no concentration camps and no war criminals for us to put on t-shirts. Sorry to disappoint you, but this is how great civilisations work.
(The Brit, 5 July 2011 16:09)
--
It has less to do with great civilisations and more to do with ethnic purity. You don't have a large English minority living in Wales and Scotland who want to remain within the UK. Neither side fought with the NAZIs nor did they commit genocide against English minorities. You won't get Germany prematurely recognising either state and allowing unresolved issues to cause instability.

Now, when it comes to N.Ireland, I'm not sure how your great civilisation fits in there. That situation comes closer to the conflicts in Yugoslavia. Imagine the Catholics unilaterally declaring independence without the support of the Protestants and the Vatican immediately recognising it and pressuring other UN members to do the same.

The external Western meddling in the former YU contributed greatly to the instability.

Now Lenny, dear friend. You've come up with this "Scottish" oil thing before and it's complete nonsense. The people of Shetland, in whose waters the remaining oil is to be found, are culturally Scandinavian and do not associate themselves with Scotland, as you'd know had you ever met one. If Scotland decides to become a sort of wind-swept Greece (and they've only to look across the water at Ireland to see what a bad idea that is), Shetland and Orkney will vote as they always do, to remain alligned with London. Even if they decided to go it alone themselves, Edinburgh isn't going to get its theiving hands on the oil.
(The Brit, 4 July 2011 20:46)

I would recommend you to read the International Sea Law which ,as i understand,has been ratified by the uk government and you will see who owns the North Sea oil.I also understand the SNP has campaigned in past uk general elections using the slogan of oil as a platform for Scottish independence.

Now Greece has got nothing to do with Scottish independence but for some reason you brought it up again.But let me repeat again that had it not been for the wizard of oz Melvin King and his magic wand that created £ 1 trillion on his computer screen and saddling each household in uk with £50000 debt(that's only the banks bailout) you wouldn't be posting about Greece.

Whatever happens with Scotland, let it be clear that there is no malice between the England and Scotland. This is not Yugoslavia. There is no fighting and no murder - neither will there ever be need for it or argument for it.

Comparisons with the breakdown of Yugoslavia are fatuous.

It is not the Scots who get to decide on independence - it is the people who live in Scotland of whatever ethnicity. Scotland is not owned by the Scots - it is owned by the people who live in Scotland of whatever ethnicity they may be. While there is a pride in being Scottish - it should be noted that many Scots live well beyond the Scottish borders. They may be Scots, but they will not get a vote.

The relations between Scotland and England are on the most friendly of terms. Further, as Scotland is (and will most likely remain) with the EU, it has open borders - so the people of England will have as much right to go and live there as they do currently.

Personally I see no real point in Scottish independence. It won't make things fundamentally different for the people of Scotland. The UK functions well for all of the people in it - the kind of narrow nationalism that motivates some people is actually an insult to the others who are well integrated and do not share that feeling of selfish isolationism.

Speaking as a citizen of the UK - I hope that the people of Scotland (my fellow citizens) will value our union and will seek to preserve it.

Personally I see no real point in Scottish independence.
Speaking as a citizen of the UK - I hope that the people of Scotland (my fellow citizens) will value our union and will seek to preserve it.
(R, 5 July 2011 05:11)

Maybe you don't but I hope that Scotland leave Great Britain followed closely by Northern Ireland, then you can call Wales and England "Great Britain" if you like.

I find this very strange. Most English people have no problem with the Scots and would wish them well if they became independent.

Th population of the UK is too big and breaking it down into smaller chunks would possibly help.

Poll: 48% of English oppose Scottish independence

Almost half of people in England do not want Scotland to become independent, the BBC reported, quoting the results of an opinion poll.

Comment -

The Scots - Walesians and Irish,
has beem Bullied by the Anglo-Saxians from Northwest Germany for some
Fifteenhundred Years now.

And the Mayority of The Anglosaxians in the Province of Englanf in greater Britonia are probably not over Fifty procent,
their Familynames may give the Answer to that.

Now the English will taste their own beak up,
in a Civil War of their own.

"Wait ans see said the Englishman - Wait and see" !.

Arn.Sweden.

Doesnt matter, unilateral independence is allowed, England said so in 2008
(New Zealander, 4 July 2011 20:14)

So England said unilateral independence is allowed when a Scottish Prime Minister of the United Kingdom decided to recognise Kosovo?

You're not making any sense.

Brit,
as I understand it, it is irrelevant what these peoples of the shetlands want. they are not a member of the uk, but a region within scotland. scotland can legally declare udi without a problem, but a subset of scoland cannot.
or is it that n.mitro region, who would prefer to stay with serbia can delcare themselves independent from kosovo, or rs from bosnia or presevo from serbia?
udi is okay upto state/provincial level but not deeper than that.

so... oil stays with scotland, shetlanders can leave for england if they wish, or live in free scotland.

Th population of the UK is too big and breaking it down into smaller chunks would possibly help.
(Andy UK, 4 July 2011 16:45)
--
Actually, there are about 5 million Scots and 50 million English so breaking it up even further means the Scots get a lot more land proportionally while England becomes even more populated with less resources.

Norway is doing extremely well due to its North Sea oil and I suspect Scotland will do the same. This will work well for Scotland but not for England. Once Scotland goes then so will Wales and possibly N.Ireland, which in turn could trigger the break-up of the US of A and EU.

It is eloquently described in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms -> the Dynastic Cycle: “The Empire, long divided, must unite: long united, must divide.”

You guys are already fracturing the UK with this talk. Why can't these Scandinavians join Norway or Sweden? That's where they belong right?

How about Berwick, can that rejoin Scotland? Check -> [link]
How about the Republic of Yorkshire? Check -> [link]
How about independence for Cornwall? Check -> [link]

We are not only talking about breaking up the UK but England also. You think it is immune to the problems Yugoslavia faced and Serbia faces? You think the "Kosova" precedent could not backfire on the UK? It is normally a good economy that keeps a country glued but when things go wrong then the more wealthier parts break away first followed by the rest.

You never know, you might just experience some very power nations breaking up the UK in your lifetime like the UK, US and Germany did with Yugoslavia.
(Zoran, 5 July 2011 14:08)

As a Yorkshireman (born n' bred) and a member of the Yorkshire Ridings Society I would love to see a break up of England. An independent Republic of Jórvík's Shire would suit me well, however I'd personally settle for Yorkshire aka Jórvík's Shire to become a constituent country of the UK/ a British Republic (as most Yorkshirians are Republicans, like mi' sen).

As regards to the Shetlands and Orkney, if they want to rejoin with a Scandinavian country (probably Norway?), then they're well in their right to do so if that is what the masses believe in.

To be honest, I believe this manufactured artificial "Kosova Precedent" could turn out to be quite useful to suit my own political needs and desires.

Now let me end this comment by a famous quote by Sit Bernard Ingham.


"If the Scots can have independence, then in terms of being a viable unit Yorkshire can too. It's larger, it has more population, it has every asset you could need. If we are playing that narrow game, Yorkshire is entitled to independence and its own Parliament. But is that what we want today? It's playing into the hands of those people who want to break up the United Kingdom and let Europe rule the various parts."


YORKSHIRE TILL I DIE!

Independence for Scotland YES!!

Inependence for Yorkshire, oh YES!! We don't want those crooks in London telling us what to do.