Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

Snickers Man

Bonniedog wrote: »

And you refer to others as "lamebrains" :rolleyes:

If fish is of such unimportance then why did the EEC make its surrender THE key factor in admitting this state in 1972?

And why are they making it a red line issue now?

Because it's the French they're dealing with. And it IS important to them.

But it's not to us, culturally. And therefore we have never developed an industry or culture around it to the same extent as other maritime nations like the Spanish, or Italians, or Portugese.

What's the Irish equivalent of Paella, or Vongole, or Putanesca?

Admit it: we're just not that interested.

forgottenhills

Bonniedog wrote: »

The same people now brown nosing every shyster in a suit in Brussels are same ones who were handing over Irish republicans to the Brits.

I was in the republican movement then. I doubt any of you "green jersey" merchants were.

So in other words you were either an anti-democratic terrorist or a fan of the same - don't try to mince words or to be shy here. So your complete lack of good judgement on that issue is matched by your complete lack of good judgement on the value we receive by being a member of the EU. Whats your alternative to the EU? You mentioned Norway - but they are in the EEA (which is like being in the EU without a vote).

forgottenhills

Aegir wrote: »

What does “ever closer Union” mean?

No one has ever defined that and there are key figures within the eu that believe federalisation is the goal.

I’m not saying it will happen, but I don’t believe you can say it will not for certain.

A federal Europe has definitely being on the wish list of many of the politicians that have shaped Europe over the years. They would ideally like a common foreign policy and a EU army at some point. You can understand this to some degree as the EU has being fairly powerless to intervene in some important disputes on its borders.

However I believe and I personally hope that a federal Europe has died a death now for a generation or more at least with the shock of Brexit and difficulties with some Eastern European states. But if NATO ever disappears then I think it should again come onto the agenda and Ireland should then seriously consider signing up to the concept at that point. We need to take steps at some point to contribute to our own security and not be relying totally on others in this area as we are at present.

First Up

Aegir wrote:

What does “ever closer Union†mean?

The full phrase is " ever closer Union between the peoples and member states".

Aegir wrote:

No one has ever defined that and there are key figures within the eu that believe federalisation is the goal.

Anyone is welcome to believe what they want. There is nothing in any of the EU treaties that imply, threaten or aspire to it being anything other than a union of sovereign states.

Aegir wrote:

I’m not saying it will happen, but I don’t believe you can say it will not for certain.

I can't say for certain that Santa Clause won't ring my doorbell on Friday but I can say for certain that a federal Europe will only happen when it has been agreed by the electorates and governments of 27 sovereign states. You are free to decide for yourself if you want to bet on that happening.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

The full phrase is " ever closer Union between the peoples and member states".

ok, cool. What does it mean?

First Up wrote: »

Anyone is welcome to believe what they want. There is nothing in any of the EU treaties that imply, threaten or aspire to it being anything other than a union of sovereign states.

there are lots of things that weren't in eu treaties, until they were....

First Up wrote: »

I can't say for certain that Santa Clause won't ring my doorbell on Friday

yes, yes you can.

First Up wrote: »

but I can say for certain that a federal Europe will only happen when it has been agreed by the electorates and governments of 27 sovereign states. You are free to decide for yourself if you want to bet on that happening.

all 27 states? what if 24 vote for it, or 20 or 10? do they then become part of the high speed europe and the others become the slower speed, or do they just get squeezed out?

To use your analogy, you can actually say that Santa won't be ringing your door bell this Friday, because Santa is a myth. The concept and drive for a federal europe is not, it is a very real concept and something that a number of key european figures support.

First Up

Aegir wrote:

ok, cool. What does it mean?

It means it will remain a union of sovereign states.

Aegir wrote:

there are lots of things that weren't in eu treaties, until they were....

And they were not in the treaties until they were unanimously agreed by the member states. That's how it works.

Aegir wrote:

all 27 states? what if 24 vote for it, or 20 or 10? do they then become part of the high speed europe and the others become the slower speed, or do they just get squeezed out?

24 out of 27 is not unanimous. If 24 countries want to amalgamate they can do so but it will not be in the framework of the European Union.

Aegir wrote:

To use your analogy, you can actually say that Santa won't be ringing your door bell this Friday, because Santa is a myth. The concept and drive for a federal europe is not, it is a very real concept and something that a number of key european figures support.

And you and every other citizen of an EU country has exactly the same voting power on that as any "key European figure".

There is no political party or elected member of the government or parliament of any EU member state with a federal Europe in their manifesto. When they start to appear and gain traction, you can start shouting about the threat they carry.

In the meantime you need to invent better reasons to oppose the EU.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

It means it will remain a union of sovereign states.


And they were not in the treaties until they were unanimously agreed by the member states. That's how it works.



24 out of 27 is not unanimous. If 24 countries want to amalgamate they can do so but it will not be in the framework of the European Union.



And you and every other citizen of an EU country has exactly the same voting power on that as any "key European figure".

There is no political party or elected member of the government or parliament of any EU member state with a federal Europe in their manifesto. When they start to appear and gain traction, you can start shouting about the threat they carry.

In the meantime you need to invent better reasons to oppose the EU.

So a federal Europe could happen then.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

So a federal Europe could happen then.

There is a chance I could be in a multiple vehicle pile up - does not stop me owning and driving a car.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is a chance I could be in a multiple vehicle pile up - does not stop me owning and driving a car.

So would you say you would never be in a car crash?

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

So would you say you would never be in a car crash?

No.
But using 'the chance' as an excuse not to have a car is counterproductive and a huge loss to me and my lifestyle and wellbeing.

Padre_Pio

Aegir wrote: »

So would you say you would never be in a car crash?

A multiple pile up? Id say yes to that. Also yes that I won't be involved in a plane crash, terror incident or and go into space.

You wouldn't plan your life thinking you're going to win the lottery, so why would you plan your politics thinking that Europe would become a federal state?

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No.
But using 'the chance' as an excuse not to have a car is counterproductive and a huge loss to me and my lifestyle and wellbeing.

who said anything about "Chance"? You get in your car with your eyes wide open fully aware that there are idiot on the road who could cause an accident and on the basis you don't want an accident, you take care for this not to happen.

You can' simply say that a federal europe will never be a condition of joining, because there are people, in positions of influence, who want this to happen. If it is something you don't, then you can't dismiss it otherwise people could easily sleep walk in to a federal europe.

read my post and the post I was replying to.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

who said anything about "Chance"? You get in your car with your eyes wide open fully aware that there are idiot on the road who could cause an accident and on the basis you don't want an accident, you take care for this not to happen.

You can' simply say that a federal europe will never be a condition of joining, because there are people, in positions of influence, who want this to happen. If it is something you don't, then you can't dismiss it otherwise people could easily sleep walk in to a federal europe.

read my post and the post I was replying to.

You can keep shouting at people in cars that they are sleep driving into a pile up while you walk in the rain. (formerly known as 'tilting at windmills')

There won't be a federal Europe by accident, it will only happen if that is what the EU member states want.

Donald Trump

Aegir wrote: »

who said anything about "Chance"? You get in your car with your eyes wide open fully aware that there are idiot on the road who could cause an accident and on the basis you don't want an accident, you take care for this not to happen.

You can' simply say that a federal europe will never be a condition of joining, because there are people, in positions of influence, who want this to happen. If it is something you don't, then you can't dismiss it otherwise people could easily sleep walk in to a federal europe.

read my post and the post I was replying to.

It's a pity that the UK were so lacking in both self-confidence and belief in their own ability to stand up for themselves that they chose to run away rather than realise that they had a strong input into steering the direction of the union.

Imagine being in a union in work. And being paranoid that all of the people you work with are so stupid that they other union reps will be able to easily fuck you over. So. instead of trying to send competent people to represent you to the conferences and union leadership meetings you instead decide to elect people who only want to break up the union.

UK has fallen a long way from the 80's influence when they were able to push through the concept of single market and also negotiate a large rebate.......now their shining lights just moan and cry about some imagined oppression.

and here we go again.

anyone saying something that goes against the group think gets their comments taken out of context and subject to the usual ad hominem.

sorry I dared to criticise the european union. All hail the EU.:rolleyes:

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

and here we go again.

anyone saying something that goes against the group think gets their comments taken out of context and subject to the usual ad hominem.

sorry I dared to criticise the european union. All hail the EU.:rolleyes:

Maybe stop scaremongering and presenting an image of yourself as somehow wiser than everyone else?

Basically stop behaving like the British establishment? Because it doesn't stack up when looked at in any rational way. 'Tis why the UK is where it is, innit?

PeadarCo

Aegir wrote: »

and here we go again.

anyone saying something that goes against the group think gets their comments taken out of context and subject to the usual ad hominem.

sorry I dared to criticise the european union. All hail the EU.:rolleyes:

What you are doing is perpetuating the same old lie that the EU is some sort of authoritarian federal super state and you are unhappy about being called out. As First Up quiet eloquently pointed out its not. The EU is still a trade bloc. A highly integrated trade bloc and with all the infrastructure a highly integrated trade bloc requires. The EU is a long long way from becoming a superstate and in Ireland alone would require at least one referendum (probably even more given how far off the EU currently is from being a federal state) never mind other countries.

Brexit is a perfect example of how the EU isn't a superstate. The UK has been able to leave when it decided to. Imagine trying the same thing in other federal countries such as the USA, Germany etc. Even Scotland if it wants to leave the UK requires Westminster ascent. All the UK had to do was to trigger article 50 of the Lisbon treaty and the EU could do nothing.

fly_agaric

Aegir wrote: »

sorry I dared to criticise the european union. All hail the EU.:rolleyes:

LOL, There will or there will not be a federal EU down the road depending mainly on what the member state governments decide to do.
What the UK government or UK citizens think, or how they feel about it now is completely irrelevant imo.

Padre_Pio

Aegir wrote: »

and here we go again.

anyone saying something that goes against the group think gets their comments taken out of context and subject to the usual ad hominem.

sorry I dared to criticise the european union. All hail the EU.:rolleyes:

Oh poor you.

You got called out on your bullsh*t.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Maybe stop scaremongering and presenting an image of yourself as somehow wiser than everyone else?

Basically stop behaving like the British establishment? Because it doesn't stack up when looked at in any rational way. 'Tis why the UK is where it is, innit?

more ad hominem

PeadarCo wrote: »

What you are doing is perpetuating the same old lie that the EU is some sort of authoritarian federal super state and you are unhappy about being called out.

nope, not even close

fly_agaric wrote: »

LOL, There will or there will not be a federal EU down the road depending mainly on what the member state governments decide to do.
What the UK government or UK citizens think, or how they feel about it now is completely irrelevant imo.

yet you still chose to reply.

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Oh poor you.

You got called out on your bullsh*t.

and more ad hominem.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

more ad hominem

Criticism of your bizarre point of view and insistence on conspiracy theories even when they have been demolished.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Criticism of your bizarre point of view and insistence on conspiracy theories even when they have been demolished.

And what bizarre point of view is that Francis?

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

And what bizarre point of view is that Francis?

That the 'EU' (some nebulous part of it that is controlling 27 sovereign states) has a grand plan to be a federated state.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That the 'EU' (some nebulous part of it that is controlling 27 sovereign states) has a grand plan to be a federated state.

ok. here's a suggestion.

Go back, read my posts and actually respond to what i have written, rather than what you think I have written.

storker

Donald Trump wrote: »

It's a pity that the UK were so lacking in both self-confidence and belief in their own ability to stand up for themselves that they chose to run away rather than realise that they had a strong input into steering the direction of the union.

This probably had something to do with the fact that the ruling elites and Fleet Street peddled the "decisions forced on us by Europe" narrative so many times that they forgot it was something they just made up.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

ok. here's a suggestion.

Go back, read my posts and actually respond to what i have written, rather than what you think I have written.

When somebody pointed out to you that

There is nothing in any of the EU treaties that imply, threaten or aspire to it being anything other than a union of sovereign states.

your answer was the 'scaremongering'

there are lots of things that weren't in eu treaties, until they were....

Totally bizarre thinking and an indicator as to why the redtop led UK is where it is.

First Up

Aegir wrote: »

ok. here's a suggestion.

Go back, read my posts and actually respond to what i have written, rather than what you think I have written.

Here's another suggestion. You make a big deal about EU members being somehow coerced into a federal state, controlled behind the scenes by mysterious (but nameless) "key figures of influence". So please can you elaborate on this sinister plot - who is behind it; how they intend to engineer it; how the plotters will circumvent the protection of the rights of member states enshrined in every EU Treaty and evidenced every day in the workings of the Commission and Parliament.

Maybe you could support your argument with some examples of the march to a federal Europe that you are seeing across the governments and electorates of the EU. Which politicians in which countries are urging their citizens to lose their national sovereignty?; how much electoral support they are getting? and how and where you are witnessing the emergence and rise of federalist parties?

I ask this because you have banged that hollow drum to such an extent that it suggests to me that you really don't have any other argument to offer as justification of your anti- EU stance. It is hopeless but hey, its the best you can do.

So let me ask you this; if you could be persuaded or re-assured that the EU leading to a Federal Europe is an impossibility unless it is the unanimous wish of every member state, what other objections to the EU do you have that we should take seriously?

First Up

First Up wrote: »

Here's another suggestion. You make a big deal about EU members being somehow coerced into a federal state, controlled behind the scenes by mysterious (but nameless) "key figures of influence". So please can you elaborate on this sinister plot - who is behind it; how they intend to engineer it; how the plotters will circumvent the protection of the rights of member states enshrined in every EU Treaty and evidenced every day in the workings of the Commission and Parliament.

Maybe you could support your argument with some examples of the march to a federal Europe that you are seeing across the governments and electorates of the EU. Which politicians in which countries are urging their citizens to lose their national sovereignty?; how much electoral support they are getting? and how and where you are witnessing the emergence and rise of federalist parties?

well, you could start with the Union of European Federalists. https://www.federalists.eu/spinelli-group and their initiative to reinvigorate the endeavour for the federalisation of the European Union.

First Up wrote: »

I ask this because you have banged that hollow drum to such an extent that it suggests to me that you really don't have any other argument to offer as justification of your anti- EU stance. It is hopeless but hey, its the best you can do.

my anti EU stance?

you mean my not agreeing with the group think in this echo chamber.

First Up wrote: »

So let me ask you this; if you could be persuaded or re-assured that the EU leading to a Federal Europe is an impossibility unless it is the unanimous wish of every member state, what other objections to the EU do you have that we should take seriously?

you see, that is just putting words in to my mouth.


It is ridiculous and frankly sad, but my fault i guess for trying to have a grown up conversation.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When somebody pointed out to you that

your answer was the 'scaremongering'




Totally bizarre thinking and an indicator as to why the redtop led UK is where it is.

so you still haven't read my initial post on this topic then Francis.