Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Brexit: The Last Stand (No name calling)

1…5859616364…333

Comments

  • #1802
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 76,097 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    The media hates him, the big multinationals hate him, he is going to rip the system apart. Due to social media and the availability to vast swathes of information, the media have less control on society now, that is what I think anyway.

    Social media has harmed him just as much, giving a platform to those he stiffed and abused (allegedly).
    I don't think we will notice much difference under the Donald. The UK might have to pay more for military protection though :)


  • #1803
    Rjd2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,291 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    :D she leads a majority of MPs who don't want to leave.

    Her 'colours' are that she will do what she is told to do. The courts have said it is Parliament who is sovereign in this.

    Yep, May has wanted leadership for a while, she will do whatever it takes to secure her position and as people have forgotten she campaigned to remain.
    She isn't keen for a general election yet and Labour looking at polling shouldn't be demanding one anytime soon. If I was Jeremy, I'd sit back and wait, in a few years, if the people are pissed off with what Brexit has brought, May would be much more vulnerable than she will be next year.

    In saying that Donald Trump is 3/1 to become US President, so who the **** knows anymore:pac:


  • #1804
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    The media hates him, the big multinationals hate him, he is going to rip the system apart. Due to social media and the availability to vast swathes of information, the media have less control on society now, that is what I think anyway.

    Social media has harmed him just as much, giving a platform to those he stiffed and abused (allegedly).
    I don't think we will notice much difference under the Donald. The UK might have to pay more for military protection though :)
    So we should, the British military has taken a battering in recent years due to cuts and not enough investment.


  • #1805
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    You don't need to predict the future to rule out unlikely scenarios.

    Em no ruling out things is predicting the future. Rabbiting on about what will happen is a ridiculous form of discourse.


  • #1806
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 76,097 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    So we should, the British military has taken a battering in recent years due to cuts and not enough investment.

    You will be paying the Donald to invest in his.


  • Advertisement
  • #1807
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    So we should, the British military has taken a battering in recent years due to cuts and not enough investment.

    But the UK will have less money to invest in the armed forces.


  • #1808
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,115 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Trump is going to win on Tuesday, the time of the Establishment is over.

    The very establishment that underwrites the failed state in the northeast of Ireland?

    You know what I think? I think the DUP's pro-Bexit has helped bring the date of United Ireland much sooner that it would have been.

    If you think the Tories are going to divert resources for the care of 'the mad cousin' when there's immediate family business to look after then you're sorely mistaken.

    You'd better hope the British economy flourishes or the people in the six counties who aren't sentimental about the concept of the UK, the majority of the population that is, will look to the South/EU.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_TEmN49hcU


  • #1809
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Trump is going to win on Tuesday, the time of the Establishment is over.

    The very establishment that underwrites the failed state in the northeast of Ireland?

    You know what I think? I think the DUP's pro-Bexit has helped bring the date of United Ireland much sooner that it would have been.

    If you think the Tories are going to divert resources for the care of 'the mad cousin' when there's immediate family business to look after then you're sorely mistaken.

    You'd better hope the British economy flourishes or the people in the six counties who aren't sentimental about the concept of the UK, the majority of the population that is, will look to the South/EU.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_TEmN49hcU
    Go read the GFA regarding that issue. It has nothing to do with Brexit and the current situation. Only when a border poll is called will it be relevant. Which it won't anytime soon.


  • #1810
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,115 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Only when a border poll is called will it be relevant. Which it won't anytime soon.

    As I said, you better hope austerity doesn't bite too hard in the northeast of Ireland or the majority who live there, who have no sentimental attachment to British dependency, will start eyeing the South/EU. You think SF and the SDLP won't capitalise on it if the British start cutting off the transfers?

    Tick, tock, tick, tock, tick, tock...


  • #1811
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,896 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    You want more proof look at post #1708, more ignorant bile.

    Quite truthful I would have thought. Have you seen some of the 'ignorant bile' being hurled by the Brexiteers? I.e., some of the tweets aimed at Gina Miller since the judgement? Neatly fits the openly racist description very well IMO.


  • Advertisement
  • #1812
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,274 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Quite truthful I would have thought. Have you seen some of the 'ignorant bile' being hurled by the Brexiteers? I.e., some of the tweets aimed at Gina Miller since the judgement? Neatly fits the openly racist description very well IMO.
    You're making wide sweeping statements based on the actions of a few.
    Here's what was in the tweet that you support.
    The Brexit vote wasn’t democracy in action. It was populist ignorance on a grand scale:
    The Brexit vote was mostly the result of an unholy alliance between a dumbed-down, middle-class, aging English electorate fed on a diet of Daily Mail and Express propaganda, Thatcherite Little Englanders and openly racist arseholes.
    That's ignorant bile, it adds nothing to the debate.
    Making lazy generalisations is easy.
    Acknowledging differences and trying to understand people who's opinions you disagree with takes maturity.
    The way the debate is going at the moment we're on a fast-track to the shouting in each others face.
    There's no need to echo the tone of the US Presidential elections.


  • #1813
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,896 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    You're making wide sweeping statements based on the actions of a few.
    Here's what was in the tweet that you support.

    That's ignorant bile, it adds nothing to the debate.
    Making lazy generalisations is easy.
    Acknowledging differences and trying to understand people who's opinions you disagree with takes maturity.
    The way the debate is going at the moment we're on a fast-track to the shouting in each others face.
    There's no need to echo the tone of the US Presidential elections.

    How is it ignorant bile, especially when it comes to open racism? Racist tweets have been aimed at Gina Miller, plus actual death threats. Abuse has also been aimed at the 3 judges. Indeed a respectable (allegedly) organ, the Telegraph, ran a headline: 'The judges versus the people'. Do you not find it utterly bizarre that those who wanted to 'rescue' their governing system from 'Brussels' are now engaging in wholesale attacks on that very system from a position, best described as being founded on ignorance?


  • #1814
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    How is it ignorant bile, especially when it comes to open racism? Racist tweets have been aimed at Gina Miller, plus actual death threats. Abuse has also been aimed at the 3 judges. Indeed a respectable (allegedly) organ, the Telegraph, ran a headline: 'The judges versus the people'. Do you not find it utterly bizarre that those who wanted to 'rescue' their governing system from 'Brussels' are now engaging in wholesale attacks on that very system from a position, best described as being founded on ignorance?
    The abuse these people are receiving is wrong but you can't justify your claim that Brexit voters were all ignorant by the abuse Gina miller and the 3 judges are receiving.


  • #1815
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,896 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The abuse these people are receiving is wrong but you can't justify your claim that Brexit voters were all ignorant by the abuse Gina miller and the 3 judges are receiving.

    I never claimed they were all ignorant, but you can't deny either that the leave campaign had a barely suppressed undercurrent of discrimination based on prejudice running through it which has spectacularly reemerged following this judgement.


  • #1816
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,862 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Considering 19 billion is spent of our own money to the EU every year, I think investing more money in the NHS is certainly doable.
    Oh dear.

    The nett figure is a little less than half that because of all the EU money spent back in the UK. It's scary to think our economy is threatened by people who still don't get that basic fact.

    BTW Northern Ireland costs more than EU membership.



    What you see is what you get
    You've made your bed, you'd better lie in it
    You choose your leaders and place your trust
    As their lies wash you down and their promises rust
    You'll see kidney machines replaced by rockets and guns
    And the public wants what the public gets
    - Paul Weller
    Going Underground, The Jam

    Defence costs a LOT. How much has been spent on the carriers (and their escorts) that might have a third of the number of aircraft they need by 2023 ? And that's if the whole thing doesn't go the way of many other projects that depended on the US equipment arriving on time and on budget. But hey that money would only be wasted on kidney machines if it wasn't used to pork barrel.

    BTW the NHS costs £116.4 Bn a year - The UK nett contribution to the EU wouldn't last a month.


  • #1817
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    Oh dear.

    The nett figure is a little less than half that because of all the EU money spent back in the UK. It's scary to think our economy is threatened by people who still don't get that basic fact.

    BTW Northern Ireland costs more than EU membership.



    What you see is what you get
    You've made your bed, you'd better lie in it
    You choose your leaders and place your trust
    As their lies wash you down and their promises rust
    You'll see kidney machines replaced by rockets and guns
    And the public wants what the public gets
    - Paul Weller
    Going Underground, The Jam

    Defence costs a LOT. How much has been spent on the carriers (and their escorts) that might have a third of the number of aircraft they need by 2023 ? And that's if the whole thing doesn't go the way of many other projects that depended on the US equipment arriving on time and on budget. But hey that money would only be wasted on kidney machines if it wasn't used to pork barrel.

    BTW the NHS costs £116.4 Bn a year - The UK nett contribution to the EU wouldn't last a month.

    The UK, like other NATO nations is required to spend 2% of its GDP on defence.

    The UK is one of few NATO members fulfilling its obligations.


  • #1818
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,274 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Deleted User wrote: »
    How is it ignorant bile.......
    The Brexit vote was mostly the result of an unholy alliance between a dumbed-down, middle-class, aging English electorate fed on a diet of Daily Mail and Express propaganda, Thatcherite Little Englanders and openly racist arseholes
    Do you feel this is a well articulated thoughtful post?
    Do you see post calling people arseholes as valued contributions?
    Deleted User wrote: »
    I never claimed they were all ignorant, but you can't deny either that the leave campaign had a barely suppressed undercurrent of discrimination based on prejudice running through it which has spectacularly reemerged following this judgement.
    You're original point was about the voters not about the campaign.


  • #1819
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,896 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    Do you feel this is a well articulated thoughtful post?

    Truth doesn't always have to be polite.
    Do you see post calling people arseholes as valued contributions?

    The term that the tweeter used was 'openly racist arseholes'. Most people would view open racists with contempt.
    You're original point was about the voters not about the campaign.

    The campaign had no problem appealing to those with less than desirable views.


  • #1820
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,862 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The UK, like other NATO nations is required to spend 2% of its GDP on defence.

    The UK is one of few NATO members fulfilling its obligations.
    So what you are saying is that most NATO countries don't spend as much ?

    Good thing the UK doesn't have to follow the rules of an expensive club that makes decisions it has to follow.


    Spending at the levels of Italy or Canada would free up about 22 Bn pounds, and still leave the UK in the worlds largest military alliance by far. If Russia or China wanted to invade the UK they just don't have enough ships.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_naval_forces_in_the_Falklands_War


  • #1821
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    So what you are saying is that most NATO countries don't spend as much ?

    Good thing the UK doesn't have to follow the rules of an expensive club that makes decisions it has to follow.


    Spending at the levels of Italy or Canada would free up about 22 Bn pounds, and still leave the UK in the worlds largest military alliance by far. If Russia or China wanted to invade the UK they just don't have enough ships.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_naval_forces_in_the_Falklands_War
    Spending at the levels of Italy or Canada would leave the UK lower than the 2% spending mark.

    It isn't about defending the British Isles but projecting power across the globe. Britain along with perhaps France are the only two European countries left with power projection capabilities.

    The UK has Trident for self defense.


  • Advertisement
  • #1822
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    At this stage Russia, China and India will buy out the UK entirely.


  • #1823
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,862 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Spending at the levels of Italy or Canada would leave the UK lower than the 2% spending mark.
    But doesn't the UK have sovereignty and make it's own rules ?
    It isn't about defending the British Isles but projecting power across the globe. Britain along with perhaps France are the only two European countries left with power projection capabilities.

    The UK has Trident for self defense.
    It'll be 2023 before they get 24 jets for the carriers, how long is it since the Harriers were stood dow ? And the world has changed. India and China have big carriers with capable aircraft. They also have supersonic cruise missiles, as does Iran.

    Re Trident. It's nice to think of the UK and France covering each other but there was the embarrassing incident where a collision between their missile subs more or less cancelled out the deterrent.

    So the UK can't power project like it used to. The Vulcans are gone. Black Buck was certainly far more impressive than the PR stunts of the B52's flying over friendly airfields en route. But that was a long time ago. And even back then the carriers were being phased out to India and Oz.



    NATO is the UK benefiting from being in a larger organisation. To the extent they are prepared to pay well above average for the privilege.

    The only real difference is that NATO exists to prevent illegal immigration :pac:


  • #1824
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Isn't the new UK carrier actually on lease from the USA and subject to being taken back if the yanks need it in an emergency?


  • #1825
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,862 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    catbear wrote: »
    Isn't the new UK carrier actually on lease from the USA and subject to being taken back if the yanks need it in an emergency?
    No.

    The aircraft though ...


  • #1826
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    No.

    The aircraft though ...
    The aircraft on the carrier?

    That's an even worse deal! A aircraft carrier without aircraft is merely a floating soccer pitch.


  • #1827
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    catbear wrote: »
    The aircraft on the carrier?

    That's an even worse deal! A aircraft carrier without aircraft is merely a floating soccer pitch.
    It's unlikely the yanks are going to be involved in a major war that drains their resources that Britain also is not involved in.


  • #1828
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    But doesn't the UK have sovereignty and make it's own rules ?
    They do. They also have obligations and it's important to lead by example.
    It'll be 2023 before they get 24 jets for the carriers, how long is it since the Harriers were stood dow ? And the world has changed. India and China have big carriers with capable aircraft. They also have supersonic cruise missiles, as does Iran.

    Re Trident. It's nice to think of the UK and France covering each other but there was the embarrassing incident where a collision between their missile subs more or less cancelled out the deterrent.

    So the UK can't power project like it used to. The Vulcans are gone. Black Buck was certainly far more impressive than the PR stunts of the B52's flying over friendly airfields en route. But that was a long time ago. And even back then the carriers were being phased out to India and Oz.



    NATO is the UK benefiting from being in a larger organisation. To the extent they are prepared to pay well above average for the privilege.

    The only real difference is that NATO exists to prevent illegal immigration :pac:
    Neither India, China or Iran have a blue water navy. China are developing one but it'll be a while.


  • #1829
    Cartouche
    Closed Accounts Posts: 248 ✭✭Cartouche


    Its a bit worrying when members of parlament are criticising the decision of the courts. I mean the fundamentals of their democracy is based on respecting an independent judiciary. Not accepting decisions you happen not to like is not part of the bargain.


  • #1830
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Only when a border poll is called will it be relevant. Which it won't anytime soon.

    As I said, you better hope austerity doesn't bite too hard in the northeast of Ireland or the majority who live there, who have no sentimental attachment to British dependency, will start eyeing the South/EU. You think SF and the SDLP won't capitalise on it if the British start cutting off the transfers?

    Tick, tock, tick, tock, tick, tock...
    You are a bit deluded, no offence. We had one of the worst financial crisis in 2008 and it didn't move public sentiment significantly at all. The last thing the secretary of state will do right now is call a border poll. Forget about it.


  • Advertisement
  • #1831
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    Considering 19 billion is spent of our own money to the EU every year, I think investing more money in the NHS is certainly doable.
    Oh dear.

    The nett figure is a little less than half that because of all the EU money spent back in the UK. It's scary to think our economy is threatened by people who still don't get that basic fact.

    BTW Northern Ireland costs more than EU membership.



    What you see is what you get
    You've made your bed, you'd better lie in it
    You choose your leaders and place your trust
    As their lies wash you down and their promises rust
    You'll see kidney machines replaced by rockets and guns
    And the public wants what the public gets
    - Paul Weller
    Going Underground, The Jam

    Defence costs a LOT. How much has been spent on the carriers (and their escorts) that might have a third of the number of aircraft they need by 2023 ? And that's if the whole thing doesn't go the way of many other projects that depended on the US equipment arriving on time and on budget. But hey that money would only be wasted on kidney machines if it wasn't used to pork barrel.

    BTW the NHS costs 116.4 Bn a year - The UK nett contribution to the EU wouldn't last a month.
    It isn't EU money, it is OUR money. If you fail to realize that, the conversations is fruitless.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement