Does this post fly in the face of logic?

[Keystone Phil]

The US doesn't have official diplomatic relations with any Protestant leader, or Muslim or Buddhist or any other religious institutions for that matter either.

Uh...do any of those leaders have an independent state set up to even be recognized?

No, but the Vatican is barely a state either. It has less population and about as much area as my neighborhood. Should my neighborhood be an independent state? Should the city of Minneapolis (WAY more people than the Vatican) have diplomatic relations with foreign countries?

Also it was Mussolini who granted the Vatican state independence, so therefore it is illegitimate.

Apparently, many of the countries of the world aren't really states because a few major cities and neighborhoods in America have more people and more area. Also, we now apparently decide whether or not we should have diplomatic relations with countries based on their population.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

I heard about a guy once, in a TV show, who was trying to set on a state on a former oil rig in the North Sea, a British guy IIRC, he wanted to make a tax heaven managed by net, I don't know what it becomes of his project now...

What is a state? What some recognize as being one, not?

[Keystone Phil]

I heard about a guy once, in a TV show, who was trying to set on a state on a former oil rig in the North Sea, a British guy IIRC, he wanted to make a tax heaven managed by net, I don't know what it becomes of his project now...

What is a state? What some recognize as being one, not?

But basing it off of population is stupid and saying that City X has more people than Country Y so Country Y isn't really a country is also stupid.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

I heard about a guy once, in a TV show, who was trying to set on a state on a former oil rig in the North Sea, a British guy IIRC, he wanted to make a tax heaven managed by net, I don't know what it becomes of his project now...

What is a state? What some recognize as being one, not?

But basing it off of population is stupid and saying that City X has more people than Country Y so Country Y isn't really a country is also stupid.

Yes, yes, that was the sens of my post.

If one day, the UN decide that a village of Dogons in Malia is a state, well for the UN that will be a state, period. We've diplomatic relations with who we recognize as legitimate to have one, here that would be with the chief of the village.

And if ever it is needed to give a serious example to counter that theory of the population, the city of Tokyo is more populated than the state of Singapoor.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Diplomatic relations are not only nation to nation.  Minnesota's governors have made trips all over the world, meeting with foreign officials and business leaders to discuss trade and economic partnerships between Minnesota and those nations.  Jesse Ventura went to Cuba and met Fidel Castro to try and sell Minnesota farm products to the country.  

So the whole argument is moot...

But anyway..

the Vatican City is an internationally recognized nation, though a very small one, and it is considered an ally, thus we have official relations with them.

That's just how it works.  If the leaders of the Red Lake band of Chippewa Indians decided to call our end of the treaties due, and in our failure to pay (of course we wouldn't), they could break off and form their own, sovereign nation completely separate from the United States.

Would we have diplomatic relations with them?  You can bet your butt.  How would it look to all other Native Americans in the country if we were to try and punish them for trying to uphold the treaties that our government signed and never made good on?

Of course right now things are fine because the state government appropriates a lot of money to the reservation (though it has no responsibility to) and fills at least some of the gaps that the federal government has left behind.

But yeah, anyway.. what were we talking about again?

[Coburn In 2012]

Yes, Phil.  absolutely

[Meeker]

I heard about a guy once, in a TV show, who was trying to set on a state on a former oil rig in the North Sea, a British guy IIRC, he wanted to make a tax heaven managed by net, I don't know what it becomes of his project now...

What is a state? What some recognize as being one, not?

You're thinking of Sealand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

I heard about a guy once, in a TV show, who was trying to set on a state on a former oil rig in the North Sea, a British guy IIRC, he wanted to make a tax heaven managed by net, I don't know what it becomes of his project now...

What is a state? What some recognize as being one, not?

You're thinking of Sealand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand

Exactly! Thanks a lot.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Athos

More people than the Vatican, similar status, and no diplomatic recognition.

[Keystone Phil]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Athos

More people than the Vatican, similar status, and no diplomatic recognition.

Again, population is irrelevant. Stop mentioning it.

Also, if you want to have an argument for recognizing a country of a similar status, fine! Your post made no sense because it used your city as some stupid standard for how many people a country should have. Why not make it "If a country doesn't have as many people as New York City, it's not a real country?" You then went on to say that because your city is bigger, one must logically support it having diplomatic relations with other countries.

Nothing in your post made sense.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

     No. Just no.

[War on Want]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

     No. Just no.

He has a decent point there. Not that I am saying it is sane to support not recognizing the Vatican.

[Purple State]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

     No. Just no.

He has a decent point there. Not that I am saying it is sane to support not recognizing the Vatican.

Does he really? The fact is the Vatican has operated as an independent entity throughout European history.

Population really is irrelevant to nation status. There are a ton of very tiny nations throughout the world with tiny land mass (Israel) and tiny population (Luxembourg comes to mind).

[The Mikado]

I probably shouldn't say this, but accepting/not accepting a country's "legitimacy" is absurd.  Which is why I call Myanmar "Myanmar" and if it were retaken by the pro-democracy forces tomorrow I'd call it "Burma."  Did not recognizing the CCP's rule of China for a quarter-century make its rule nonexistent?  No, it was just an arrogant rejection of reality that prevented us from working on arranging a Sino-Soviet Split for decades.  Was the USSR still the Russian Empire up until the Thirties when we finally got around to recognizing it?

[War on Want]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

     No. Just no.

He has a decent point there. Not that I am saying it is sane to support not recognizing the Vatican.

Does he really? The fact is the Vatican has operated as an independent entity throughout European history.

Population really is irrelevant to nation status. There are a ton of very tiny nations throughout the world with tiny land mass (Israel) and tiny population (Luxembourg comes to mind).

I am not talking about population but rather Mussolini's creation of the state later. Everything else is fairly stupid.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

     No. Just no.

He has a decent point there. Not that I am saying it is sane to support not recognizing the Vatican.

     His point fails miserably because he's saying that executives of sovereign nations should not be recognized if they suck. I cannot begin to describe how insane that view is.

[Purple State]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

     No. Just no.

He has a decent point there. Not that I am saying it is sane to support not recognizing the Vatican.

Does he really? The fact is the Vatican has operated as an independent entity throughout European history.

Population really is irrelevant to nation status. There are a ton of very tiny nations throughout the world with tiny land mass (Israel) and tiny population (Luxembourg comes to mind).

I am not talking about population but rather Mussolini's creation of the state later. Everything else is fairly stupid.

The first line was directed at you. The second part was directed at BRTD. The bit about Mussolini is absurd. Plenty of horrible people have created and run nations. We don't simply refuse to recognize them and hope to wish them away. And of all places, Vatican City is not some place of horrid crimes. It is recognized as an independent state, so what does it really mean to deny its existence?

[Torie]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

If Italy re-granted the Vatican's "independence," would that make it all better?  In many ways, the Vatican is an ersatz country anyway. It is a complex with nice gardens, with a few permanent residents. Most folks "commute" into it for work. It is about as independent as Monaco in some senses. It exists based on the tolerance of its host. And finally, almost nobody cares about this issue for good reason. It just doesn't matter.

[War on Want]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

     No. Just no.

He has a decent point there. Not that I am saying it is sane to support not recognizing the Vatican.

Does he really? The fact is the Vatican has operated as an independent entity throughout European history.

Population really is irrelevant to nation status. There are a ton of very tiny nations throughout the world with tiny land mass (Israel) and tiny population (Luxembourg comes to mind).

I am not talking about population but rather Mussolini's creation of the state later. Everything else is fairly stupid.

The first line was directed at you. The second part was directed at BRTD. The bit about Mussolini is absurd. Plenty of horrible people have created and run nations. We don't simply refuse to recognize them and hope to wish them away. And of all places, Vatican City is not some place of horrid crimes. It is recognized as an independent state, so what does it really mean to deny its existence?

It depends who is Pope and under what conditions. I mistyped what I meant. I meant that when Latern Treaty was signed it would not be unreasonable for a nation to not recognize them as being legitimate. Pope Pius was not exactly a model pope and his complaints against Mexico "persecuting" Catholics was a joke, along with some other issues. I wouldn't have jumped to recognize Vatican City as a nation at first.
Then again I have very strong biases against the Catholic Church.

[Keystone Phil]

I love when BRTD talks stupid to me.

[dead0man]

There are 4 things one needs to a have an in dependant state.
1.Defined territory-it helps if you can defend it from your attack either via your own armed forces or with bigger friends
2.People-it needs to be more than you and your dog on an island
3.a govt-it can be just you
4.the ability of that govt to freely enter relations with other independent states


It helps if you get other independent states to acknowledge you exist.

It doesn't matter how big (or small) you are or who first recognized you.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Population really is irrelevant to nation status. There are a ton of very tiny nations throughout the world with tiny land mass (Israel) and tiny population (Luxembourg comes to mind).

Both of which are far larger than the Vatican.

My point is that if you remove the religious aspect from the Vatican, it becomes less relevant and important than my neighborhood, which is roughly equal in area and far larger in population. So yes, recognition of it is a religious thing as it has no importance beyond a religious HQ. And no one recognizes Mount Athos, despite it being in a similar state.

The first line was directed at you. The second part was directed at BRTD. The bit about Mussolini is absurd. Plenty of horrible people have created and run nations. We don't simply refuse to recognize them and hope to wish them away. And of all places, Vatican City is not some place of horrid crimes. It is recognized as an independent state, so what does it really mean to deny its existence?

What you refer to is a very common practice. Plenty of countries including the US refuse to call Burma by the name the junta calls it (Myanmar). Liechtenstein won't even recognize the Czech Republic and Slovakia because of a land ownership dispute.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Anyone with a simple knowledge of the history of western civilization understands the special status of the Vatican and why it is treated as a state.  It has more historical legitimacy than many other nation-states out there.

Its independence was granted by Mussolini, so no in my view it is not legitimate unless you consider Mussolini legitimate.

Mussolini was the legitimate leader of Italy, so anything that he did was legitimately a government action.

Yes, FTR.