kuro68k wrote: » The British government is going to take it right to the cliff edge and hope that someone else compromises. Of course they have their excuses already lined up if no-one does, only real question is who they will blame.
FrancieBrady wrote: » There is no popcorn left. I'm biting hard on kernels. It really is extraordinary that when all the dust settles this is what they are left with.
Larbre34 wrote: » Just out of long day away from the news, so to catch up am I right in saying that as of now Britain has... Negotiated itself to either economic armageddon OR loss of sovereignty over two of its territories / protectorates in order to avail of more limited access to its most convenient markets and to accept a whole range of regulations, which is currently has a say in, but won't after the fact?
Folkstonian wrote: » The vote in parliament will be scarcely more than a formality. She’s a hopeless PM and her position is more insecure than ever.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » They have a third option of changing their mind in light of new evidence and remaining in.
Jim2007 wrote: » I’m not so sure anymore, I suspect that she has far better intelligence on what the feeling on the ground in the constituencies is than we give her credit for. You’d think on the face of it cobbling together 48 letters to start a leadership challenge would have been easy and yet they failed to arrive - take that as a warning if I was a BREXITEER. If she does not call for a three line whip, she may well get the votes she needs.
cml387 wrote: » Apparently the Pizza Club (Leadsome,Fox and other cabinet Brexiteers) have a wheeze up their sleeves. Assuming defeat for the Withdrawal agreement, they will ask for a year's extension and then go straight to hard Brexit, presumably having by that time got their sh!t together .This was reported by Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph this morning. On the face of it, the EU would need to approve an extension but, it's a possibility. It would leave us in the ordure in March 2020 though.
prawnsambo wrote: » Well that's the cunning plan out in the open then. Do these people think EU leaders can't read English newspapers?
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.
prawnsambo wrote: » But if the plan is to just use an extended transition period as a smokescreen for a hard brexit and the EU leaders know this, why would they grant it?
Gintonious wrote: » https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/1065719004923342850 Looks like the Brits can start pointing the finger at the Spanish as well as the Irish now.
cml387 wrote: » prawnsambo wrote: » Well that's the cunning plan out in the open then. Do these people think EU leaders can't read English newspapers? 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.
cryptocurrency wrote: » And the EU. Merkel called for the end of sovereignty.https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1048913/brexit-news-angela-merkel-germany-eu-sovereignty-uk She told the event, titled ‘Parliamentarianism Between Globalisation and National Sovereignty’: "In this day nation states must today - should today, I say - be ready to give up sovereignty.Between this and the Army talk the EU is getting dangerous. I hope Washington and London are talking about to to nip this who thing in the bud.
cml387 wrote: » It's not a smokescreen. They'd be quite open about their intentions.
joe40 wrote: » Maybe I'm missing something. I'm far from an expert on UK politics
joe40 wrote: » Are remainers not taking a huge risk voting against this deal since no deal option is terrible.
joe40 wrote: » In terms of the HoC vote. Is there any chance reminers from all parties will support the bill through gritted teeth to avoid a no deal exit. Do they see other options if the vote fails? Will it not be up to the Tory party, and no one else, whether to call for a new vote or an election. Are remainers not taking a huge risk voting against this deal since no deal option is terrible. Maybe I'm missing something. I'm far from an expert on UK politics
LeinsterDub wrote: » Everything is on the table. There is currently a lot of talk of May puts the vote to the HoC it's rejected. Que currency collapse and general bad things. May gives this a couple of weeks. Meanwhile the option of a second vote is put to the HoC and this is also rejected (part of May's plan). May returns to the HoC mid December and says its my way or the highway in the hoping opposition MPs don't follow their parties whip to avoid absolute madness
cryptocurrency wrote: » And the EU. Merkel called for the end of sovereignty.https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1048913/brexit-news-angela-merkel-germany-eu-sovereignty-uk She told the event, titled ‘Parliamentarianism Between Globalisation and National Sovereignty’: "In this day nation states must today - should today, I say - be ready to give up sovereignty. Between this and the Army talk the EU is getting dangerous. I hope Washington and London are talking about to to nip this who thing in the bud.
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.
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.
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.:(
funkey_monkey wrote: » I didn't know this. Can you point me to your source for this information? Thanks.
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?
