Venezuela has become the 3rd country to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia

I've been all over Quebec, and it's a very different experience from the rest of Canada.

You must have really detested the collapse of the Soviet Union. Separatist rebels toying with the Socialist program.

Or is it opression and a complete disregard for the individual needs of an area that brings about secessionist tendencies?

Well, that is a little different. For a start you gained ownership of the island illegally, therefore the legitimacy of your ownership would be in doubt Either way, call in Interpol perhaps.

Interpol aren't an operational agency and require consent and approval of member-states to have any dealings with them - in a new country, they could do squat.

OK, you've raised an issue about landownership - I suppose we can remove that from the imaginary scenario and assume I had undisputed title.



Save the United States, where we fought a war over the issue, all left with the consent of the British Parliament; their independence was a gift given, not an assertion made. But as I have said above, these were external possessions, never integral parts of the UK. They were never able to involve themselves in the constitutional process which decided their apparently sovereign government in London.



It would be practically impossible, but I certainly support movement in that broad direction. Which is why I support organisations like the European Union and the United Nations.



The relevant 'people' to whom we must pay heed in a sovereign state, on matters of its constitution, are the 'people' of that state, whole and indivisible. To try and invent new representative groups - essentially a new demos - is fundamentally anti-democratic. Indeed, democracy can never function where the people are held to ransom by other groups with special legal privileges: democracy is built on the broad legal equality of all citizens.



Mugabe doesn't do badly out of elections, unfortunately.

And...? I'm surprised it's taken Chavezuela this long to recognise them, so crazy, pro-Russia and anti-America is its dicta...president.

He may be crazy, but he is extremely popular and he has won all of the elections fairly. He is not a dictator by any means.

Interpol aren't an operational agency and require consent and approval of member-states to have any dealings with them - in a new country, they could do squat.

OK, you've raised an issue about landownership - I suppose we can remove that from the imaginary scenario and assume I had undisputed title.



Save the United States, where we fought a war over the issue, all left with the consent of the British Parliament; their independence was a gift given, not an assertion made. But as I have said above, these were external possessions, never integral parts of the UK. They were never able to involve themselves in the constitutional process which decided their apparently sovereign government in London.



It would be practically impossible, but I certainly support movement in that broad direction. Which is why I support organisations like the European Union and the United Nations.



The relevant 'people' to whom we must pay heed in a sovereign state, on matters of its constitution, are the 'people' of that state, whole and indivisible. To try and invent new representative groups - essentially a new demos - is fundamentally anti-democratic. Indeed, democracy can never function where the people are held to ransom by other groups with special legal privileges: democracy is built on the broad legal equality of all citizens.



Mugabe doesn't do badly out of elections, unfortunately.

Scratch most of that. Without being a hypocrite I think I may actually agree with you. While I still believe in democracy which was my basic point I do also believe that unifying people and creating bonds has more advantages than splitting them up (economies of scale, as it were), it's just a pity that forcing them may be necessary.

I guess United Kingdom is better than Scotland, United Ireland, Wales and England. **** the little people who can't see the big picture.

Well ... it is? What's wrong with it?

Dividing people causes conflict, Social Identity Theory and all that. What's better than uniting people? Rather than dividing and segregating them all, how is that possibly progress?

I never thought I'd say this but national identity is just nonsense, it really has no use and creates nothing by small-mindedness and xenophobia. What is really wrong with throwing differences out the window and uniting everyone?

You Sir have lost your mind. I debated chavs who made more sense.

China is against Taiwan's separation, so We-the-West must support it.

The US and all of Europe don't recognise the RoC or maintain official diplomatic relations with it, so that's quite wrong.


Oh, someone already said - sorry.

The US and all of Europe don't recognise the RoC or maintain official diplomatic relations with it, so that's quite wrong.

You Sir have lost your mind. I debated chavs who made more sense.

Well, the RoC isn't an independent country, it's essentially the government-in-exile of all of China. As for recognition, most states do in effect recognise it and have relations with it - it is only because China refuses to have relations with any country that has relations with Taiwan that more states don't.

I thought these days the RoC were happy to accept they are the government of only Taiwan?

Well, the RoC isn't an independent country, it's essentially the government-in-exile of all of China. As for recognition, most states do in effect recognise it and have relations with it - it is only because China refuses to have relations with any country that has relations with Taiwan that more states don't.

Placating the Communist Chinese is rather more important in practice than principles are.



I was under the impression that you were a chav...

It is something that the Yanks should wait after their arbitrary and illegal reckognition of Kosovo region. Personally I support the territorial integrity of all countries, including Serbia and Georgia but yanks should foresee the consequences of their actions in Balkans. Especially now with Russia becoming a leading superpower.

Russia becoming a leading superpower? With it's population crisis and economy I think not. Unless you're hinting the possibility that Russia could become a superpower in 100-200 years time, then perhaps, once it has nuked the rest of the world and is the last one standing it may claim superpower status, until then, it won't become one anytime soon.