31-03-2004 17:36									#121
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Oncle Boris Oh, they're not out, but we'd just count the results separately. BTW, I don't think the Anglos have the right to secede...

Right. They're second class citizens. Let's not count their votes cause they're not voting the way that i want them to. Are you going to identify people in Westmount with something so we know who the bastards are?
Hmmm let's see: the star of David thing has been done already....

	31-03-2004 19:03									#122
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: The Supreme Court ruled that they would be forced to listen to the result of a referendum.

You answered your own query:

They could change the law to disallow democratic referendums

And I don't know how it works in Canada, but the federal government in the US is free to ignore US Supreme Court decisions it doesn't like.

quote: To say that Quebec has been ruling the confederation, you would need to prove that the separatists and nationalists have been somewhat heard.

No, all I have to prove is which province most of the PM's belong to. Just because they don't agree with YOU doesn't mean they are traitors .

quote: No, we're not being oppressed or anything but there is a significant unheard voice here.

Let me state it again:

"we're not being oppressed"

So you're a bunch of idiotic whiners? Thought so. Democracy is only good if you win, right?

quote: the balance of a sovereign Quebec is 0.

I'll let nye or Asher rip this apart. Quebec is definetly above 0!

quote: Let's not count their votes cause they're not voting the way that i want them to.

Well that's his argument for PMs from Quebec. They aren't doing what he wanted them to, so they are traitors .

	31-03-2004 19:24									#123
	Tired of ads?

As far as I can tell there's a hell of a lot more imposition of French culture on the rest of culture than English culture on Quebec. For example the government being stricly bilingual even in places where more people speak a third language than French. It seems that separatism is more a tactic for Quebec to get its way at the expense of the rest of Canada and it seems to have worked admirably thus far...

	31-03-2004 20:53									#124
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Richelieu Apparently there is no lawful way to "undo" a country. Quebec does have borders that are legally/internationaly recognized i believe. Any individual, country or corporation wishing to do commerce or deal in any way at the provincial level with Quebec is subject to do it within the limits of its territory only. If not de jure, at the international level, at least de facto borders then. (Although i am pretty much certain that the current borders do have a legal value, but i guess a lawyer would know more about this than i do) I know that that argument has been used to justify that Quebec's claim on Labrador were void since it entered in contracts with Newfoundland & Labrador for transport of electricity: it implicitly accepted the territory's borders. Also: i realize that i've been educated in Quebec's school system by teachers who were very probably overwhelmingly in favor of independance. That may hastainted their / my vision of things but : what i was taught was that nations have a right to "dispose of themselves". Then came the definition of a nation, which included a distinct culture and a geographical area governed by a representative legislative body. I believe Quebec does meet all of these requirements. Gotta go now but i'll come back later.

IIUC its a priniciple of international law that the decision to organize based on a federal system is an INTERNAL matter of a country, and does NOT grant ANY right in international law to secede beyone what would exist otherwise. Ergo the existince of Quebec as a PROVINCE of Canada is irrelevant in international law, as are its provincial boundaries. Quebec can gain independence with Canadas consent, in which case international law protecting sovereignty would not matter - but then Canada might well choose to negotiate the frontiers, and NOT accept the current provincial boundaries, which were agreed to ASSUMING Quebec stayed in Canada. OR Quebec might seize independence unilaterally - if successful they would become de facto sovereign, a status that would lead to de jure recognition under international law. However if they failed to achieve de facto control over the James Bay region, they would not gain de jure rights to this area in this fashion.

Geographic and cultural distinctivenes is not the basis for a claim of sovereignty under international law. That is why the world has not yet seperated Kosovo from Yugoslavia and continues to recognize that Chechnya is part of Russian, etc.

International law is very conservative in this regard - it recognizes the rights of the de facto ruler as sovereign, subject to limitations on the inadmissibality of gaining territory by force (but this seems to apply only where that force was exercised since the founding of the UN) and the general rule against overseas colonial empires.

	31-03-2004 20:59									#125
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Oncle Boris Oh well, then I'll explain you. The underlying idea behind any democracy is that its citizens must have a sincere feeling towards the nation they belong to.

someone please get Arik Sharon on the line - your demographic problem has been SOLVED.

	31-03-2004 20:59									#126
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

LOTM: Mostly spot on. One minor quibble:

quote: if successful they would become de facto sovereign, a status that would lead to de jure recognition under international law.

Not always. If the de facto soveriegn isn't recognized by any other state as being independant then it isn't a de jure soveriegn. Look at the Taliban in Afghanistan. It wasn't really considered a soveriegn ruler because it had not been recognized as such by most of the world.

	31-03-2004 21:01									#127
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

That and the fact that they still didn't control the country.

	31-03-2004 21:03									#128
	Put an end to popups!

They controlled enough... if the world recognized them as rulers of Afghanistan, they would have been the de jure soveriegn instead of just the de facto ones. What I'm saying is that it doesn't automatically follow.

	31-03-2004 21:29									#129
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui They controlled enough... if the world recognized them as rulers of Afghanistan, they would have been the de jure soveriegn instead of just the de facto ones. What I'm saying is that it doesn't automatically follow.

But what was the legal basis, for withholding recognition - I presume the Talibans human rights record and harboring of Al Qaeeda - neither likely to be an issue for an independent Quebec.

	31-03-2004 21:33									#130
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Canada should split into bite sized little bits so as not to adversly effect US digestion.

	31-03-2004 21:36									#131
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: But what was the legal basis, for withholding recognition

Because they didn't want to . There doesn't have to be a legal basis for withholding recognition. Every state has the soveriegn power to recognize foriegn governments, or not to.

	01-04-2004 05:23									#132
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Take a look at the boundries of Quebec when it entered Confederation. The north was acquired AFTER joining - not before. Canada has a very legit claim to those lands.

Yep. That's the first point. The borders of an independent Quebec would revert to those borders of Quebec before Confederation.

Secondly, you have the problem of the anglo minority within Quebec.

I find some similarities between the situations of the Anglo minorities there, and the partition between India and Pakistan. You had minorities of Muslims and Hindus in both areas, and the way they resolved those issues is to give all the majority Hindu areas to India, and the majority Muslim areas to Pakistan.

Suppose we were to apply that same logic to Quebec, those areas within Quebec with Anglo majorities would have to be relocated to Canada, in the event Quebec seperated. Secondly, you would likely have to make those areas contigious with the rest of Canada, through additional cessation of territory.

In exchange, French minorities within Canada have the option of relocating to Quebec.

	01-04-2004 05:26									#133
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Suppose we were to apply that same logic to Quebec, those areas within Quebec with Anglo majorities would have to be relocated to Canada, in the event Quebec seperated. Secondly, you would likely have to make those areas contigious with the rest of Canada, through additional cessation of territory. In exchange, French minorities within Canada have the option of relocating to Quebec.

	01-04-2004 05:29									#134
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Yep. That's the first point. The borders of an independent Quebec would revert to those borders of Quebec before Confederation.

Why?

	01-04-2004 05:32									#135
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Of course, those cessations would have to be negotiated.

I think it's rather funny, and I'm not the only one to comment on the fear of the French from their Anglo speaking minority population. I don't see any reason why they should cede Montreal since in many cases, they have lived there just as long as the Francophones.

	01-04-2004 06:44									#137
	Inflate your Upload Space

Sorry.

I do get hungry you know.

quote: Why?

Because on what grounds could you claim title to the land?

	01-04-2004 06:56									#138
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither As it wouldn't be the first choice of most Albertans either. However, there is a similar very small percentage of people in both provinces who feel we would be better off together on our own. Of course, some of them think that Washington, Oregon and maybe Idaho would join us, so I suppose that tells you how grounded in reality they are.

Although it is ridiculous - the point here is that it's even more viable an OVERALL option that a sovereign Quebec. Seriously; Quebec is a novelty act worth absolutely nothing on its' own. Even oil "rich" Alberta would be on precarious enough a future with its limited (although comparitively broader) industry

Canada is fricking Canada.. let's make the out Ontario influence through a new right together

	01-04-2004 06:58									#139
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Does anyone want to guess how long until Zylka gets banned again? My guess is 30 minutes.

	01-04-2004 06:59									#140
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

FAT RABBIT

	01-04-2004 06:59									#141
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Naw, Ming's on the prowl.

10 at most.

	01-04-2004 07:01									#142
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Zylka removed it.

	01-04-2004 07:02									#143
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Attack the message, not the picture the messenger attached.

	01-04-2004 07:02									#144
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I found it a candid and revealing look into the state of Canadian affairs.

	01-04-2004 07:03									#145
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Dylan is my friend

	01-04-2004 07:04									#146
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Really, we don't need people exposing the Canadian mystique.

	01-04-2004 15:12									#148
	Increase Your PM Length

Zykla - Can I see what would have got you banned, puh-lease.

Lord of the Mark - Excellent analysis of International Law. However, International Law is based on maintaining the status quo. There are so many artificial boundaries because the people drawing the boundaries didn't give a damn about the people living there. In fact, International Law and the precepts BEHIND it have given us most of the insurgencies and genocides since WW2, and has given us a fair number of wars. It is the de facto way things are settled, but to say it "works" depends on how you define that. Ask the Tutsi in Rawanda, or the Tamils in Sri Lanka (where India intervened on very thin pretensions in the interior affairs of a sovereign state, very similiarly to numerous US interventions in Central America).

Havel permitting the break-up of Czechoslovakia is a better model. "The rights of the governed...", etc. Yes, I know most countries pay lip service to that at best, including the US. Oligarchs, Religious leaders who feel they are RIGHT, and dictators aren't going to subscribe to this, and neither are majorities who control areas that really are ethnically and geographically seperate. Look at the Kurdish portion of Iraq (another artificial creation post-WW1 by the Brits, I've known high school students who could have done a better job of drawing borders) and how the Shia leadership wants to control that portion of Iraq. I guess I'll never be a good leader, the desire for power and control over others is something that I have never had an emotional connection to.