Because they named them first Îles Malouines when they established the first colony and I guess the name has stuck.
Islas Malvinas is a translation of the French
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Falkland_Islands#Early_colonisation
Cont: Brexit: Now What? Magic 8 Ball's up
- Thread starter Dave Rogers
- Start date
-
- Tags
- brexit
- Status
Because they named them first Îles Malouines when they established the first colony and I guess the name has stuck.
Islas Malvinas is a translation of the French
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Falkland_Islands#Early_colonisation
angrysoba
Philosophile
That’s not what my rugby mates told me.
True, but I cannot see how that relates to dudalb's point.
Then again a project to build a bridge between Scotland and Northern Ireland would face challenges if Scotland was independent and the project had been foisted on them by Boris Johnson. I suppose if the UK carried the entire cost of the project, the Scots' objections may be diminished - though a foreign country building a bridge without your consent is an interesting prospect.
Operating the bridge would be fun. Huge lorry parks would likely be required either side to accommodate the vehicles waiting for customs inspection. Then again this would be trivial compared to the problems of the land border between Scotland and England.
That said, it's pointless getting too worked up about it. This was yet another example of Boris Johnson "just saying stuff" (a la Trump
). There's no money for the scheme, little demand (at least not enough to justify that level of spend) and the engineering challenges, whilst not insurmountable, are significant. IOW - not going to happen in my lifetime.True, but I cannot see how that relates to dudalb's point.
Then again a project to build a bridge between Scotland and Northern Ireland would face challenges if Scotland was independent and the project had been foisted on them by Boris Johnson. I suppose if the UK carried the entire cost of the project, the Scots' objections may be diminished - though a foreign country building a bridge without your consent is an interesting prospect.
Operating the bridge would be fun. Huge lorry parks would likely be required either side to accommodate the vehicles waiting for customs inspection. Then again this would be trivial compared to the problems of the land border between Scotland and England.
That said, it's pointless getting too worked up about it. This was yet another example of Boris Johnson "just saying stuff" (a la Trump
Don't worry, if the result of Brexit is an independent Scotland the Northern Ireland is sure to follow. They might as well take the UK money and have the bridge. Ireland and Scotland would both be EU members anyway and the bridge would be welcome to their infrastructure.
A Scotland-England border is more of a challenge, but it's not insourmountible. Having glanced at the map I can see five major highways, if you limit traffic on other crossings to personal vechiles with passangers holding English (or whatever the new country is called), Scott or Irish passports you have a managable problem. Much of the border runs along a national park and a river, it's a different situation than in Ireland.
Of course it's not ideal, but by Brexit standards it's downright trivial.
McHrozni
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Unfortunately the existing border infrastructure is a little to the South of the current border. Then again, if I lived in Northumberland, I might want to live in a newly independent Scotland - especially if Scotland were in the EU.
I think you have vastly underestimated the problem - if the intention is to secure the English border against the hordes of EU citizens who might come pouring across it.
Heck, even if the intention is to secure the border against smuggling, how are you going to ensure that only passenger vehicles (what, no work vans or farming vehicles, remember many farms straddle the border) without having a manned border checkpoint on all of the hundreds of smaller roads, green lanes and even bridle paths which cross the border ?
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
angrysoba
Philosophile
I think the border wall would be there to prevent the hordes of unwashed Anglo-Saxons heading north to pillage food and medicine.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
England will end up back in the EU soon enough. hell maybe even in schengen and the euro after they lose all their exemptions. that would be a nice end to brexit.
The usual solution are obviously manned border checkpoints and an overview of the control of traffic to and from the area by setting up observation points further back inland. These aren't proper checkpoints, nobody gets stopped there, but there is police/customs presence that takes note and possibly follows and stops lorriers who might want to cross the border at an uncontrolled point.
It might seem weird to a Brit, but there is ample precenens for such borders, even between Shengen area members and non-EU members.
Copy this address into Google maps and examine the border. This was an external EU border between 2004-2013 and has been an external Schengen border from 2007 onwards. For six years this was a border between a Schengen area member and the wilderness of outside of EU.
Brezovica pri Metliki 38, 8331 Suhor
If it doesn't work and if somebody knows how to obtain GPS coordinates from Google maps I can post those instead. Yes, those borders straddle a village, sometimes it runs across backyards.
Compared to this the English-Scott border is downright trivial. Most of it runs either along a river or along a natural park (presumably forest). That's borders on easy mode.
The point being, you don't have to have absolute control of every crossing, at the crossing. Other solutions exist and have been used for years, even decades, many are still in active use today.
McHrozni
Last edited:
You're right that Clarke, Grieve and Soubry don't want to return to the 1950's but they are an irrelevance to the current direction of the Conservative Party and were years before their recent expulsion. They are as relevant to the Conservatives as Blairites are to the current direction of the Labour Party.
Regarding the rest of the party, my local MP is famously anti-gay but said that he couldn't be homophobic because he once fought a gay boxer. He is now considered to be on the left of the party because the Overton Window has moved so far. "Fortunately" it's pretty monochromatic around here so he isn't forced to meet too many BAME constituents.
Guybrush Threepwood
Trainee Pirate
A7, A68 would be two off the top of my head
angrysoba
Philosophile
David Davies? I think he’s considered more right wing than David Davis, no?
I fear that may not be the case. IMO Post Brexit and post Scottish (and maybe Northern Irish) independence, England will turn inwards and make all other countries the scapegoat for all problems. The horrible EU will be blamed for all of England's woes and there will be a concerted propaganda exercise conducted by the (by now permanent - once the Scottish non-Tory MPs have gone) Conservative/Brexit Party government and the Times/Telegraph/Mail/Express/Sun. English minds will be so poisoned against the EU that we wouldn't want to join on any terms no matter how favourable
.On general matters of policy, I don't think so, and he's certainly nowhere near as right wing as, say, the Home Secretary.
i thought they call them the "Malouines".
The Spanish name "Malvinas" is based on this French original, for as wiki informs us
The Spanish name for the archipelago, Islas Malvinas, derives from the French Îles Malouines—the name given to the islands by French explorer Louis-Antoine de Bougainville iafter the port of Saint-Malo (the point of departure for his ships and colonists).
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
- Status