Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

funkey_monkey

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I know you're a silly troll, but this is a point worth making.

The US and the UK decided that in the post war settlement that they would provide security to Europe and allow it to develop economically in order to prevent it becoming militarised (and a threat) again. By providing this blanket, it meant that European countries didn't need standing armies of great strength and could devote resources to civilian infrastructure. European countries accepted this effective loss of sovereignty (in that they didn't control their own foreign policy fully) to recover from the war and they trusted their Allies who were stable and dependable to defend them when needed.

The reason there is talk of a European Army is because the US and to a lesser extent, the UK, want to withdraw this defence blanket. If no one will come to the defence of Europe, it will be for Europeans to defend it.

Burden sharing notwithstanding (and it is a legitimate gripe) best way for the US and the UK to nip this in the bud, is a full throated commitment to NATO.

I didn't know this. Can you point me to your source for this information?

Thanks.

Water John

Raab saying that UK would be better staying in EU than this Deal has really fuelled the Remainers.

flatty

10000maniacs wrote: »

Remember the bad old days when you ordered a sandwich with your beer in a bar or hotel and the only options available were cheese and/or ham.
Remember when the most popular soup was the Royco powdered variety? Remember years when there was a bad harvest of potatoes, and the only 'out of season' option was Smash mash? Remember those chicken curry mixes that you added water to?
That will be the UK circa 2019 if there is a hard Brexit unless they come up with some way of mass producing out of season vegetables like tomatoes, onions and lettuce. Potatoes and other root crops will become luxury items out of season too. Dutch lorry drivers are not going to queue for hours at the borders to bring this stuff into the UK. And even if they do, UK 3rd country tariffs enforced by the farming community will ensure they will become much more expensive. When stuff like this happens, whatever unrest there is now will seem like a tea party.

Dyou know what, that weren't bad times in Ireland at all. I think it will lead to a violent crime wave and civil unrest in England though.

McGiver

joe40 wrote: »

The EU is getting dangerous and America and London should "nip it in the bud" Who carried out the invasion of Iraq looking for imaginary WMD.

Current America policy and a destabilised Britain are much greater cause for concern.

Exactly. And the EU need the "EU army". It's a necessity, the global situation has changed and is deteriorating. Of course some member states may opt out, I'm quite sure there will be a lot of flexibility in this matter as it's sensitive topic. Germans know that them engaging may cause outrage and are very cautious. It will need to be done collectively with a clear indication that there is no one who actually bosses this whole thing (France or Germany especially) and that it's a joint effort under a joint command.

As the EU consolidates and gets stronger soft power globally (EUR is second largest reserve currency and that was achieved without any military support), very soon it will have to protect that soft power with hard power, otherwise it will decompose. You can protect your soft power without proper defence only to a certain point. Russian meddling, destabilising, hybrid war, Chinese spying opertations and American trade "war" are clear indications that the EU has to act on this.

EU army or some sort of consolidated defense must and will happen. RoI can provide nurses, doctors and the likes if they wish to stay "neutral", no problem.

Also, Frontext needs to be seriously upgraded and staffed. Suggestions and proposals have been made but the Visegrad Group (Poland and Czech Rep.) are strongly against, which is insane and hypocritical, because they said "No to migrant quatas, no economic migrants welcome. We need to protect the EU borders and help to sort out the situation in the source countries instead" and when it comes to protecting borders and empoweing Frontex, they shout that protecting borders is a national competency and they don't want EU agency policing them.:(

EDIT: By the way - there has been a Civil War on the eastern border of the EU in Ukraine for several years, where Russia is engaged milarily and incites the Civil War directly (supplies, training, manpower, hardware) and indirectly (propaganda). It may seem distant and non-existent from Irish point of view, but it doesn't change the fact.

FreudianSlippers

McGiver wrote: »

Exactly. And the EU need the "EU army". It's a necessity, the global situation has changed and is deteriorating. Of course some member states may opt out, I'm quite sure there will be a lot of flexibility in this matter as it's sensitive topic. Germans know that them engaging may cause outrage and are very cautios. It will need to be done collectively with a clear indication that there is no one who actually bosses this whole thing (France or Germany especially) and that it's a joint effort under a joint command.

As the EU consolidates and gets stronger soft power globally (EUR is second largest reverse currency and that was achieved without any military support), very soon it will have to protect that soft power with hard power, otherwise it will decompose. You can protect your soft power without proper defence only to a certain point. Russian meddling, destabilising hybrid war, Chinese spying opertations and American trade "war" are clear indications that the EU has to act on this.

EU army or some sort of consolidated defense must and will happen. RoI can provide nurses, doctors and the likes if they wish to stay "neutral", no problem.

Also, Frontext needs to be seriously upgraded and staffed. Suggestions and proposals have been made but Visegrad (Poland and Czech Rep.) are strongly against, which is insane and hypocritical, because they said "No to migrant quatas, no economic migrants welcome. We need to protect the EU borders and help to sort out the situation in the source countries instead" and when it comes to protecting borders and empoweing Frontex, they shout that protecting borders is a national competency and they don't want EU agency policing them.:(

IMHO Ireland should still train with an EU Army for defensive and humanitarian operations. Either that or we should just give up this false notion of "neutrality".

MrMusician18

funkey_monkey wrote: »

I didn't know this. Can you point me to your source for this information?

Thanks.

It's an observable reality.

cml387

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

...but where's the factual support for this view? Other than hard-core Brexiteers, is any serious economist able to support this view?

Well here's what the new PM (because May will be gone by then) will say to the EU:
"We're going to crash out on WTO terms anyway,it can either be next March or March 2020...your call."

Zubeneschamali

cml387 wrote: »

Well here's what the new PM (because May will be gone by then) will say to the EU:
"We're going to crash out on WTO terms anyway,it can either be next March or March 2020...your call."

And the EU will say "We double-dog dare you to go in March 2019", and in April 2019 the UK are back begging for emergency food and medicine.

Hard Brexit in March cannot be done. It cannot be done in March 2020 either. It is a fantasy

First Up

Water John wrote: »

Raab saying that UK would be better staying in EU than this Deal has really fuelled the Remainers.

Mr Raab's education has been speeding up in recent weeks. First he discovered that the Dover-Calais route is important and now he realises that the UK would be better off in the EU than not.

What will he discover next? I can hardly wait.

megatron989

funkey_monkey wrote: »

I didn't know this. Can you point me to your source for this information?

Thanks.

Is this an AI question? It's like something alexa would ask you.
Look up WW2 on Google, read the wiki, become enlightened. Pretty standard knowledge and not something anyone should be challenging with a trolling 'provide source' reply.
Seriously this thread is going to the dogs with people coming in and just slowing things down with conspiracy rubbish. It's like reality is some kind of opt in affair these days. Same goes for Brexit in general, it's like their are 2 ways to view it. One in reality and one in your chosen happy place where unicorns roam and eggs can be taken out of cakes on a whim.

You've only to read the last 20 pages here to see some of the glaring problems with people's world views and why things in the UK are as they are imo.

brickster69

PM Interview just now

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1065951831296069633

trellheim

EU Army is a political hot potato, and, I suggest, off-topic here as it generates huge debate in its own right.

EKRIUQ

With this new agreement I'm a bit sill confuesed as to what the UK are actually losing

Are the UK leaving all these bodies and will no input at all?
European Parliament
European Council
Council of the European Union
European Commission
Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)
European Central Bank (ECB)
European Court of Auditors (ECA)
European External Action Service (EEAS)
European Economic and Social Committee (EESC)
European Committee of the Regions (CoR)
European Investment Bank (EIB)
European Ombudsman
European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS)
Interinstitutional bodies

Are UK citizens going to lose
European Health Insurance Card (EHIC)
EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) payments
Tax agreements in the EU for instance now UK will they have pay huge property taxes in Spain now that there not EU citizens

With this agreement do the UK stop paying to the EU after the divorce settlement.

Imreoir2

EKRIUQ wrote: »

With this new agreement I'm a bit sill confuesed as to what the UK are actually losing

Are the UK leaving all these bodies and will no input at all?
European Parliament
European Council
Council of the European Union
European Commission
Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)
European Central Bank (ECB)
European Court of Auditors (ECA)
European External Action Service (EEAS)
European Economic and Social Committee (EESC)
European Committee of the Regions (CoR)
European Investment Bank (EIB)
European Ombudsman
European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS)
Interinstitutional bodies

Are UK citizens going to lose
European Health Insurance Card (EHIC)
EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) payments
Tax agreements in the EU for instance now UK will they have pay huge property taxes in Spain now that there not EU citizens

With this agreement do the UK stop paying to the EU after the divorce settlement.

The UK will lose all of the above unless the future relationship treaty makes specific provision for the UK retaining membership or access. This is possible in some areas, and in others it is not possible, obviously there is nothing short of membership of the EU that would allow the UK membership of institutions like the EU Parliament. The UK will continue paying into the EU for as long as they participate in and get the benefit of those arangements, right now that means until the end of the transition period. If the future relationship is agreed by then, future UK contributions will be determined by that new treaty. If they fail to agree a new treaty then the backstop kicks in and the UK loses access to everything not contained in the backstop and ceases to make any contribution not required by the backstop.

McGiver

brickster69 wrote: »

PM Interview just now

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1065951831296069633

So basically she has plan A and that's it. There is no plan B and she can't have one.

Cato the Elder

McGiver wrote: »

So basically she has plan A and that's it. There is no plan B and she can't have one.

Yes, it's very frustrating, but the fact is she can't give a plan B or it will affect the vote. And she can't pull a Raab and admit the EU is better.


Furthermore, I consider that Carthage must be destroyed.

Tabnabs

McGiver wrote: »

So basically she has plan A and that's it. There is no plan B and she can't have one.

The negotiations have taken place and this is the least worst outcome that has been achieved on both sides. Plan B is hard brexit and Plan C is a remain option (via another referendum). The clock has run out for amendments and repositioning, this is the best deal both sides are going to get, take it or risk the alternative.

The situation looks entirely hopeless with everyone in Parliament agin the negotiations, but May may yet tough it out and keep the bastard child safe enough to cross the line...

ancapailldorcha

A pretty shocking tweet from Fraser Nelson of the Spectator today. Normally, I'd be skeptical of claims like this but coming from a free marketeer like Nelson, this is striking:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1065685014019547136

Iain Duncan Smith is apparently planning to vote against the deal as well:

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1065626805221101570

While upto half of the Conservative party's backbenchers:

https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1065634225951522816

In the meantime, Lord Ashcroft has been polling again:





Support for an informed referendum seems to be gathering steam though from the above, Conservative voters are entrenched in their support of Brexit and will not waver any time soon. Ditto for Leave voters though the other groups surveyed are cause for hope.

An Ciarraioch

Gib being tackled through a "separate declaration", which essentially is diplomatic speak for giving Spain a toothless token to keep them quiet:

http://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1065980725017620481

Inquitus

So the Vote will be the week after next? and in the meantime we all act like its going to be passed? and when it is defeated they have 2 weeks before Parliament has a 2 week recess for Xmas. So basically we are wasting a month or so on a deal that's holed below the waterline....

blanch152

Tabnabs wrote: »

The negotiations have taken place and this is the least worst outcome that has been achieved on both sides. Plan B is hard brexit and Plan C is a remain option (via another referendum). The clock has run out for amendments and repositioning, this is the best deal both sides are going to get, take it or risk the alternative.

The situation looks entirely hopeless with everyone in Parliament agin the negotiations, but May may yet tough it out and keep the bastard child safe enough to cross the line...

There is the rickety bridge over the gorge to somewhere you are not certain of, there is the cliff to fall over and there is turning back to a past you want to leave behind.

May has been herding cats on this one and sometimes they just all escape and you are back to square one.

LuckyLloyd

cml387 wrote: »

I suppose the thinking is that the EU will suffer as much as the UK next March from a crash out, this will give both sides time to prepare.

The EU doesn’t suffer near as much though, that’s the key point Brexiteers have never fully understood.

kowtow

Have to say that despite my own confidence there are very few signals coming out of London that this is going to pass.

The idea that the markets could be used to force the hand for a second vote is a dangerous one - the risk of hard brexit is already largely discounted, and - even if it isn't - the possibility of a second vote in favour of the deal provides some support. The real risk of deliberately spooking the markets is that they won't fall hard until a second vote fails, and then they really will go downhill!

One thing that is notable here - on the Tory side at least - is that few seem to be playing for position or politics. When leavers say this is worse than staying in, they clearly mean it (which doesn't mean they suddenly favour remain!). Parliament is genuinely flummoxed, and people are falling back on very fundamental positions of principle. That's a good thing for democracy, as painful and frustrating as it may seem in the near term.

listermint

kowtow wrote: »

Have to say that despite my own confidence there are very few signals coming out of London that this is going to pass.

The idea that the markets could be used to force the hand for a second vote is a dangerous one - the risk of hard brexit is already largely discounted, and - even if it isn't - the possibility of a second vote in favour of the deal provides some support. The real risk of deliberately spooking the markets is that they won't fall hard until a second vote fails, and then they really will go downhill!

One thing that is notable here - on the Tory side at least - is that few seem to be playing for position or politics. When leavers say this is worse than staying in, they clearly mean it (which doesn't mean they suddenly favour remain!). Parliament is genuinely flummoxed, and people are falling back on very fundamental positions of principle. That's a good thing for democracy, as painful and frustrating as it may seem in the near term.

The risk of a hard brexit is largely discounted....

Yet we have various groups on both sides saying they wont for a deal.

If thats the case then its hard brexit or second referendum.


I dont listen to these excuses of against democracy to have a second vote, Its the very essence of democracy . Anyone arguing against that is a fool.

LuckyLloyd

Inquitus wrote: »

So the Vote will be the week after next? and in the meantime we all act like its going to be passed? and when it is defeated they have 2 weeks before Parliament has a 2 week recess for Xmas. So basically we are wasting a month or so on a deal that's holed below the waterline....

The EU isn’t wasting any time. Negotiations concluded and this is the best deal the UK will get. The options for the UK close off by the day. They can no longer renegotiate and they are nearly past the point of no return on ability to mitigate worst parts of a disorderly exit.

If the deal is rejected Dec 10th, Sterling will plummet below €1; the EU will kick No Deal plans into gear (and they’re more organised and have much greater resources); and UK companies will initiate contingency plans publicly. Second vote will then pass early January.

Check mate.

A masterful display of unity and process demonstrating how to create and exploit leverages when the stakes are at their highest. All the Telegraph / Brexiteer’s bluster is made to look so childish and inconsequential.

Roger_007

I find it odd that the hottest issue in the Brexit debate before the referendum, the immigration issue, has hardly featured at all since the referendum. Now the big issues are the pros and cons of the customs union and the single market and trade deals.
If the referendum was rerun, would the debate be an entirely different one?

Akrasia

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The EU isn’t wasting any time. Negotiations concluded and this is the best deal the UK will get. The options for the UK close off by the day. They can no longer renegotiate and they are nearly past the point of no return on ability to mitigate worst parts of a disorderly exit.

If the deal is rejected Dec 10th, Sterling will plummet below €1; the EU will kick No Deal plans into gear (and they’re more organised and have much greater resources); and UK companies will initiate contingency plans publicly. Second vote will then pass early January.

Check mate.

A masterful display of unity and process demonstrating how to create and exploit leverages when the stakes are at their highest. All the Telegraph / Brexiteer’s bluster is made to look so childish and inconsequential.

I thought asking people to vote for the same thing twice was undemocratic?

If this bad deal is passed due to fear of No deal, it is a shocking failure of political leadership when pretty much everyone accepts that the deal on the table is worse than remaining in the EU.

McGiver

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The EU isn’t wasting any time. Negotiations concluded and this is the best deal the UK will get. The options for the UK close off by the day. They can no longer renegotiate and they are nearly past the point of no return on ability to mitigate worst parts of a disorderly exit.

If the deal is rejected Dec 10th, Sterling will plummet below €1; the EU will kick No Deal plans into gear (and they’re more organised and have much greater resources); and UK companies will initiate contingency plans publicly. Second vote will then pass early January.

Check mate.

A masterful display of unity and process demonstrating how to create and exploit leverages when the stakes are at their highest. All the Telegraph / Brexiteer’s bluster is made to look so childish and inconsequential.

Spot on - game, set, match. Game over.

Fantastic article about all this, playing a very hard ball, exposing what Brexit is about and where it is at. I am happy to see such a frank and blunt article in such reputable paper.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/11/24/the-truth-about-a-no-deal-brexit

McGiver

Akrasia wrote: »

I thought asking people to vote for the same thing twice was undemocratic?

If this bad deal is passed due to fear of No deal, it is a shocking failure of political leadership when pretty much everyone accepts that the deal on the table is worse than remaining in the EU.

Care to propose how a better deal can be negotiated given A the red lines ob both sides, especially the UK's side, B the time available, C the fact that there something in existence called Northern Ireland and Good Friday Agreement which both need to be accommodated, and D the current political situation in the UK?

There is no better deal possible.

megatron989

Roger_007 wrote: »

I find it odd that the hottest issue in the Brexit debate before the referendum, the immigration issue, has hardly featured at all since the referendum. Now the big issues are the pros and cons of the customs union and the single market and trade deals.
If the referendum was rerun, would the debate be an entirely different one?

Yet whenever I see interviews with people on the street (although they often take place in cafes and pubs fyi) the people always mention immigration. They talk complete waffle but it's still the reason for voting Brexit for a lot of people. Lovely people by the look of them.
Has to be said that they are probably picked for their views to add some sexy sauce to the interviews but maybe not... I'm not a doctor.