• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

People from UK Read.

Slug said:
It's more humane keeping them as pets than executing them. :)
Click to expand...

Humane to who? Do those guys earn their keep in tourism? Otherwise, put their butts in the unemployment line and dump that money into your social programs. Maybe that is the best solution to the problem of worrying about royal weddings getting crashed by embittered students.

I apologize for coming in here. I saw the Canadians and being from Michigan (you know, the last line of defense against those bastards) I had to keep my eye on 'em. Just kidding Canadians, next to the Aussies, I love you best.
 
I'm in the UK, despite the efforts of the SNP.

animated%20union%20jack.gif
 
The Monarch in England has been merely a symbol of what once was for decades. Canadians honoring all things related to it is hardly any different from the British doing the same. In essence Canada gained their independence from England in much the same way that the British gained their independence from the Monarchy... peacefully.

This certainly signifies a major change from the days of bloody revolutions. Not that bloody revolutions don't still take place in countries around the world. But it certainly is encouraging to know that a county can gain it's independence through peaceful channels. It would be great to see Ireland and England resolve their differences in this manner.

Please excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is the relationship between those two countries? Just w hat exactly is the IRA attempting to accomplish, and why is England resistant to whatever it is? Hell England has owned practically the entire world at one time or another. Is Ireland the last remaining possession that they refuse to let go of? I don't seem to recall what the conflict is all about. The only knowledge I have of the rift comes from movies like 'Braveheart', 'The Devils Own', 'In the Name of the Father', etc....

I know, I know.... pitiful ain't it.
 
Outlaw71 said:
The Monarch in England has been merely a symbol of what once was for decades. Canadians honoring all things related to it is hardly any different from the British doing the same. In essence Canada gained their independence from England in much the same way that the British gained their independence from the Monarchy... peacefully.

This certainly signifies a major change from the days of bloody revolutions. Not that bloody revolutions don't still take place in countries around the world. But it certainly is encouraging to know that a county can gain it's independence through peaceful channels. It would be great to see Ireland and England resolve their differences in this manner.

Please excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is the relationship between those two countries? Just w hat exactly is the IRA attempting to accomplish, and why is England resistant to whatever it is? Hell England has owned practically the entire world at one time or another. Is Ireland the last remaining possession that they refuse to let go of? I don't seem to recall what the conflict is all about. The only knowledge I have of the rift comes from movies like 'Braveheart', 'The Devils Own', 'In the Name of the Father', etc....

I know, I know.... pitiful ain't it.
Click to expand...

Ireland is independent.

Northern Ireland is the issue. Half of Northern Ireland want to become part of Ireland and the other half want to stay a part of the UK.
 
Jammy said:
Ireland is independent.

Northern Ireland is the issue. Half of Northern Ireland want to become part of Ireland and the other half want to stay a part of the UK.
Click to expand...
:confused::confused::confused: woah there buddy...you just lost me >_>;;;
 
jamor said:
Haha

Long story short.. The French originally colonized Canada and then the Brits came in and ousted them in the Sevens Year War.
Click to expand...

It was actually the Aboriginal People who first came over to Canada via the land bridge that once linked North America with Asia. Then centuries before the French came, the Norse settled in Canada for a time before they were driven away.
 
unfortunately the Republic of Ireland is completely independent from Britain so we can't saddle them with our death Newfoundland style :(

Northern Ireland is the result of their being a majority Unionist population in the north east, but the borders artificially include many non Unionist areas (the border commission was a joke)
unionists in their (justified) fear of union with the south (later republic) led to (unjustified) suppression of nationalists
for ages their had been small scale old IRA terrorism but they were all but a joke
however after the murder of nationalist civil rights marchers by the British army the whole thing exploded (ironically the army were originally welcomed as protectors by the nationalists)

however now nationalists are breeding faster in the north, and the once 2:1 outnumbering is shrinking to an equal divide

that said I reckon we would vote no to a United Ireland
 
Northern Ireland isnt half of Northern Ireland
its 6 out of 9 counties in the province of Ulster (provinces are not administrative areas btw) and 5/6ths of Ulsters population
 
Maybe I'm better off watching movies, I think I may possibly have less of an idea now of what's going on over there than I did yesterday.

So it isn't an Ireland vs England thing at all, but a northern Ireland vs southern Ireland (sort of like Korea)... only it's only between 1/3 & 1/2 of northern Ireland vs.....

I think I'll just start drinking now.
 
Outlaw71 said:
Maybe I'm better off watching movies, I think I may possibly have less of an idea now of what's going on over there than I did yesterday.

So it isn't an Ireland vs England thing at all, but a northern Ireland vs southern Ireland (sort of like Korea)... only it's only between 1/3 & 1/2 of northern Ireland vs.....

I think I'll just start drinking now.
Click to expand...

I was going to say that you have no idea how well English/Irish/Scots/Welsh get on, but on reflection I realise that is true of all nationalities. People are people, end of.
 
Spiffing said:
I was going to say that you have no idea how well English/Irish/Scots/Welsh get on, but on reflection I realise that is true of all nationalities. People are people, end of.
Click to expand...

I only have a limited understanding of the UK and hits history. I know that it is 4 countries and I'm sure each has its differences and issues with relations to one another. Much like here in Canada with the Aboriginal People, French and English.
 
Stuntman said:
I only have a limited understanding of the UK and hits history. I know that it is 4 countries and I'm sure each has its differences and issues with relations to one another. Much like here in Canada with the Aboriginal People, French and English.
Click to expand...

This is true. Growing up in Western Canada I certainly heard my fair share of grumbling about the French Canadians. They certainly don't love each other. But I guess one difference is, while Western Canadians might boo French Canadians at the hockey game, they don't bomb them!


:o
 
Outlaw71 said:
This is true. Growing up in Western Canada I certainly heard my fair share of grumbling about the French Canadians. They certainly don't love each other. But I guess one difference is, while Western Canadians might boo French Canadians at the hockey game, they don't bomb them!


:o
Click to expand...

I certainly haven't heard much grumblings except around referendum time in Quebec. By the way, they're saying, "Luooo", not "booo" when Luongo (from Montreal) makes a save. ;)

I personally do not have anything against French Canadians. I think most of the issues tend to be more about regions rather than language of origin. I think the media makes a bigger deal out of certain events than they really are. Certainly the separation referendums are big news and generate an amount of animosity as we in the west do not want to see our country break apart.

When I was in Edinburgh, Scotland a few years ago, I learned about the Scottish parliament. The political system changed to allow Scotland to have its own parliament instead of having representatives in the UK parliament. Some transfer of power happened when it was formed in the 90's. I thought it was a very interesting how the political system worked in the UK with respect to Scotland's needs.

I have thought about whether or not such a political structure would be one that Canada and Quebec would adopt. I do not think so because my impression of separatists is that they want a separate country independent of Canada and not a pseudo independent political entity that is a mix of the provincial legislature and federal parliament.
 
Stuntman said:
...to allow Scotland to have its own parliament instead of having representatives in the UK parliament...
Click to expand...
Actually it's not instead of but as well as. They have both. This means that Scottish MPs can vote on English policies but English MPs can't vote on many Scottish policies. Go figure...
 
TheBrit said:
Actually it's not instead of but as well as. They have both. This means that Scottish MPs can vote on English policies but English MPs can't vote on many Scottish policies. Go figure...
Click to expand...

well the attempt to start federalising the UK was nuked by the good citizens of North East England :rolleyes:
 
TheBrit said:
Actually it's not instead of but as well as. They have both. This means that Scottish MPs can vote on English policies but English MPs can't vote on many Scottish policies. Go figure...
Click to expand...

Don't forget they can be our Prime Minister too :P
 
Snedd said:
I didn't pay enough attention in history but somehow we managed to have a civil war and the monarchists lost and yet we still have a monarchy. :confused:
Click to expand...

The difference is that, post-civil war, the country shifted from absolute monarchy to parliamentary democracy. The title of "monarch" is really incorrect; "head of state" more accurately describes the role, which is largely symbolic.

3devious said:
Do those guys earn their keep in tourism?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they bring in more cash than they cost the country. Foreign visitors love a bit of olde worlde pomp and circumstance. :)

Maybe that is the best solution to the problem of worrying about royal weddings getting crashed by embittered students.
Click to expand...
I doubt that is an issue. Students are like everyone else and love a free holiday to celebrate an occasion. :)

Stuntman said:
The political system changed to allow Scotland to have its own parliament instead of having representatives in the UK parliament.
Click to expand...

As noted, Scotland still has Members of Parliament representing Westminster constituencies at the UK parliament in addition to Members of the Scottish Parliament representing different Scottish constituencies at Holyrood. This is due to the nature of devolved government; some issues are still the preserve of Westminster e.g. foreign policy, defence.

TheBrit said:
This means that Scottish MPs can vote on English policies but English MPs can't vote on many Scottish policies. Go figure...
Click to expand...

English MPs can't influence policies that are devolved to Holyrood because they're simply not debated at Westminster. I believe the same applies, albeit to a lesser extent, to Wales and N Ireland. Unfortunately there's no similar devolution mechanism for England, something that everyone in Scotland saw as necessary to avoid the so-called "West Lothian Question" that you point out. The only way to currently avoid it is by Scottish MPs abstaining from votes on purely English issues, which isn't an option if (as is usual) their party operates a whip. It's a sorry mess that should have been cleared up years ago, but it suited Labour as their Scottish MPs ensured a majority.
 
Slug said:
As noted, Scotland still has Members of Parliament representing Westminster constituencies at the UK parliament in addition to Members of the Scottish Parliament representing different Scottish constituencies at Holyrood. This is due to the nature of devolved government; some issues are still the preserve of Westminster e.g. foreign policy, defence.

English MPs can't influence policies that are devolved to Holyrood because they're simply not debated at Westminster. I believe the same applies, albeit to a lesser extent, to Wales and N Ireland. Unfortunately there's no similar devolution mechanism for England, something that everyone in Scotland saw as necessary to avoid the so-called "West Lothian Question" that you point out. The only way to currently avoid it is by Scottish MPs abstaining from votes on purely English issues, which isn't an option if (as is usual) their party operates a whip. It's a sorry mess that should have been cleared up years ago, but it suited Labour as their Scottish MPs ensured a majority.
Click to expand...

Alex Salmond (Until I saw it written down I thought he was Alex Hammond! :o ) has himself pointed out that the only UK state without its own legislature is England. I'm not sure that we need one.
 
England isn't a state
the idea is you federalized the UK along the EU electoral regions, eg London, Wales. NI, North East England, Scotland
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom