nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Rhineshark

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.

1. The EU
2. Remainers
3. Ireland
4. Corbyn

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

FrancieBrady

Folkstonian wrote: »

I should hope there have been some positive returns. It would render the whole concept of an EU pointless if not.

You gave a like to the post in question.

Do you think Britain has historically ‘pissed on’ the EU? Acted like a friend who borrows money and never returns it?

I personally think it’s claptrap. But it wouldn’t be the first time I’ve had a different view to the majority.

With their vetos and opt outs of course they could be seen as having 'pissed on the EU'.

Folkstonian

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So Britain has paid in a load of money and got nothing in return?

I should hope there have been some positive returns. It would render the whole concept of an EU pointless if not.

You gave a like to the post in question.

Do you think Britain has historically ‘pissed on’ the EU? Acted like a friend who borrows money and never returns it?

I personally think it’s claptrap. But it wouldn’t be the first time I’ve had a different view to the majority.

Folkstonian

Enzokk wrote: »

Yes, it all started with Cameron and his arrogance and you are right he deserves more than 10% of the blame, but Brexit was salvagable by the right leader. Has she made one right decision? I cannot recall one thing she has won for the UK that is really a compromise for the EU.

If she was forthright with what could be achieved she could have salvaged it, but red lines and immigration.

Anyone not holding May wholly and entirely to blame is being massively generous to her in my opinion.

Brexit didn’t have to be the disaster it has turned into. It was not inevitable.

After being elected May could have slowed things right down, made the country take a collective deep breath, and initiated a process of dialogue and preparation with no arbitrarily decided time constraints so that when Article 50 was invoked, critical infrastructure was already prepared, Parliament was already in broad agreement, and people were confident that the government had understood the scale and complexity of the challenge.

She decided to do none of those things. She showed no foresight, strength or wisdom from day one of her premiership, and things haven’t improved at all since.

The whole debacle is entirely on her

Professor Moriarty

Folkstonian wrote: »

This is a laughable, absurd post.

England has never been an EU member.

The EU has never been ‘pissed on’ by Britain.

If you are really just relaying your observations of a German attitude towards Britain, then maybe we all need to readjust our views of Germans from informed, reasonable Europeans to obnoxious tossers.

Britain is a huge net contributor to the EU budget, behind only Germany and France (and actually ahead of France in a number of years since the turn of the century)

There are a number of EU states who haven’t contributed their fair share financially. Britain is categorically not one of them.

So Britain has paid in a load of money and got nothing in return?

Calina

Enzokk wrote: »

Yes, it all started with Cameron and his arrogance and you are right he deserves more than 10% of the blame, but Brexit was salvagable by the right leader. Has she made one right decision? I cannot recall one thing she has won for the UK that is really a compromise for the EU.

If she was forthright with what could be achieved she could have salvaged it, but red lines and immigration.

For me, the issue is I cannot identify a right leader bar possibly Nicola Sturgeon and there was no way in hell that was going to happen.

Folkstonian

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Even in the 80's the UK was known for always wanting to get more and more for themselves, whilst paying less and less.
The EU is well wise to their shtick and they are not willing to get pissed on anymore.
I'm just relaying the sentiment that was prevalent in Germany even in the 90's.
England had a poor reputation as an EU member, even back then. They were viewed as greedy and not wanting to contribute their fair share. That they only view the EU as an ATM and free buffet.
History has proven this to be correct.
There will be little to no leeway for their bullsh*t. They're like that friend who only calls you when he needs something, always borrows money and never pays it back.
At some stage it's over and done with.

This is a laughable, absurd post.

England has never been an EU member.

The EU has never been ‘pissed on’ by Britain.

If you are really just relaying your observations of a German attitude towards Britain, then maybe we all need to readjust our views of Germans from informed, reasonable Europeans to obnoxious tossers.

Britain is a huge net contributor to the EU budget, behind only Germany and France (and actually ahead of France in a number of years since the turn of the century)

There are a number of EU states who haven’t contributed their fair share financially. Britain is categorically not one of them.

Enzokk

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Cameron kicked it all off. He literally steered the Titanic directly into the iceberg. It's not really made any better by the fact that the British people actually voted to have a shipwreck.
He deserves a hell of a lot more than 10% of the blame.
It was utter hubris and monumental stupidity on his part that caused this whole mess.
May's handling of the whole debacle is be questionable, but one should not discount the pester power of the screaming toddlers that make up the British government.
I firmly believe that the combined IQ of any committee is substantially below the level of it's dumbest member -20.
And the larger the group and the more diverse and opposing the viewpoints, the worse it gets.
I'm amazed they got the deal they got. Even though it has absolutely no chance whatsoever.
But no deal could ever have a chance, because there are enough factions that badly want it to fail and the only deal they will accept is no deal. Going the full "Rule Britannia", the whole Nelson, make Britian great again, etc...
Basically inbred nationalistic numbskulls.

Yes, it all started with Cameron and his arrogance and you are right he deserves more than 10% of the blame, but Brexit was salvagable by the right leader. Has she made one right decision? I cannot recall one thing she has won for the UK that is really a compromise for the EU.

If she was forthright with what could be achieved she could have salvaged it, but red lines and immigration.

First Up

Tell me how wrote: »

Rjd2 wrote: »

Yep you hide Campbell away, the man is odious to say the least.

Plenty more people can articulate his POV without coming across as arrogant.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/46492287/alastair-campbell-told-to-shut-up-during-newsnight-brexit-debate

That is exactly why Campbell should be involved.

That lady needs to understand what a debate is. He did not interrupt her in a blunt/rude way, he pointed out the fallacy of what she was saying. She is the one who reacted inappropriately in quickly moving to telling him to shut up.

You need to fight fire with fire and Campbell is best suited to taking on JRM in my view.

(I agree with him having a false position on iraq but that is a different point in relation to this topic).

No, its about his credibility and once you lose that, you just don't recover. I agree with him 100% about Brexit but I don't want him anywhere near it.

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

No, it's not OK to make throwaway comments about something you don't care about, in the Politics forum, especially when it's irrelevant to the discussion. (See the charter) After Hours is the place for that kind of discussion.

You have isolated my comment without noting that prior to this I had been presented with a link to the SF website regarding expenses,this also contained details about Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness,two former para military members also allegedly guilty of worse crimes.Rather than become embroiled in further bickering -although shocked, my reaction and comment "I could`nt care less about SF" was I believe reasonable in the circumstances.I was subsequently informed the organisation affectionately referred to as "shinner" would`nt be interested in who owned what anyway.
So if my shocked answer offends you and is out of order then I acknowledge your disapproval but it is only my opinion.

Sam Russell

Tell me how wrote: »

No. The EU have a deal on the table which is fair to both the UK and the other 27 countries who will remain members of the EU.

But you are correct. If the EU stray offline even a fraction, the UK media will publish images from Normandy June 1944 with the headings saying "We have them on the run, now lets show them no mercy."

I thought their biggest success was Dunkirk, when they stood alone - fighting them on the beaches, with that incredible 'Dunkirk spirit!'.

Mind you, when I think of it, wasn't that a defeat.

Professor Moriarty

Rjd2 wrote: »

Yep you hide Campbell away, the man is odious to say the least.

Plenty more people can articulate his POV without coming across as arrogant.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/46492287/alastair-campbell-told-to-shut-up-during-newsnight-brexit-debate

In this case, you need someone who can effectively articulate facts in a debate which is Campbell's strength. This is vital in the face of Mogg's slimey, nationalistic fantasies. Odious isn't important right now, facts are. In addition, applying 'odious' as a criteria would immediately disqualify Mogg.

Tell me how

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Even in the 80's the UK was known for always wanting to get more and more for themselves, whilst paying less and less.
The EU is well wise to their shtick and they are not willing to get pissed on anymore.
I'm just relaying the sentiment that was prevalent in Germany even in the 90's.
England had a poor reputation as an EU member, even back then. They were viewed as greedy and not wanting to contribute their fair share. That they only view the EU as an ATM and free buffet.
History has proven this to be correct.
There will be little to no leeway for their bullsh*t. They're like that friend who only calls you when he needs something, always borrows money and never pays it back.
At some stage it's over and done with.

But what is always incredible is that such a person does either not see their behaviour as being unacceptable or knows it but is so focused on what they want that they just don't care that it is manipulative and selfish. I genuinely don't know which is true or whether it can be both or either.

It does echo a point I made previously about the curious practice of normally individual personality traits being evident as being held by large groups such as the UK in this instance.

dr.fuzzenstein

road_high wrote: »

I think and hope so. The EU seem willing to let them crash out with no deal so I think that’s it at this stage. If they give an inch the UK will keep coming back for more as is their form so a line has to be drawn somewhere

Even in the 80's the UK was known for always wanting to get more and more for themselves, whilst paying less and less.
The EU is well wise to their shtick and they are not willing to get pissed on anymore.
I'm just relaying the sentiment that was prevalent in Germany even in the 90's.
England had a poor reputation as an EU member, even back then. They were viewed as greedy and not wanting to contribute their fair share. That they only view the EU as an ATM and free buffet.
History has proven this to be correct.
There will be little to no leeway for their bullsh*t. They're like that friend who only calls you when he needs something, always borrows money and never pays it back.
At some stage it's over and done with.

Tell me how

road_high wrote: »

I think and hope so. The EU seem willing to let them crash out with no deal so I think that’s it at this stage. If they give an inch the UK will keep coming back for more as is their form so a line has to be drawn somewhere

No. The EU have a deal on the table which is fair to both the UK and the other 27 countries who will remain members of the EU.

But you are correct. If the EU stray offline even a fraction, the UK media will publish images from Normandy June 1944 with the headings saying "We have them on the run, now lets show them no mercy."

Tell me how

Rjd2 wrote: »

Yep you hide Campbell away, the man is odious to say the least.

Plenty more people can articulate his POV without coming across as arrogant.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/46492287/alastair-campbell-told-to-shut-up-during-newsnight-brexit-debate

That is exactly why Campbell should be involved.

That lady needs to understand what a debate is. He did not interrupt her in a blunt/rude way, he pointed out the fallacy of what she was saying. She is the one who reacted inappropriately in quickly moving to telling him to shut up.

You need to fight fire with fire and Campbell is best suited to taking on JRM in my view.

(I agree with him having a false position on iraq but that is a different point in relation to this topic).

road_high

Tell me how wrote: »

So unlikely, the official EU response in request to a meeting could well be;

Official Communique #7845
French: Vous devez plaisanter

English: You must be joking

I think and hope so. The EU seem willing to let them crash out with no deal so I think that’s it at this stage. If they give an inch the UK will keep coming back for more as is their form so a line has to be drawn somewhere

Tell me how

road_high wrote: »

How likely are the EU to agree to changes to the agreement though? To suit May and co? Seems to be the latest spin this morning!

So unlikely, the official EU response in request to a meeting could well be;

Official Communique #7845

French: Vous devez plaisanter

English: You must be joking

Rjd2

First Up wrote: »

He is also utterly discredited after his contribution to the Iraq disaster.

Yep you hide Campbell away, the man is odious to say the least.

Plenty more people can articulate his POV without coming across as arrogant.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/46492287/alastair-campbell-told-to-shut-up-during-newsnight-brexit-debate

Water John

Slim to none before a HoC vote.

road_high

How likely are the EU to agree to changes to the agreement though? To suit May and co? Seems to be the latest spin this morning!

dr.fuzzenstein

Enzokk wrote: »

You are being generous to only give her 40% of the blame. I would go as far as 90% of the blame on her. Yes she chose to take up a very difficult challenge, but she has failed at every step along the way and Cameron is not to blame for that.

Cameron kicked it all off. He literally steered the Titanic directly into the iceberg. It's not really made any better by the fact that the British people actually voted to have a shipwreck.
He deserves a hell of a lot more than 10% of the blame.
It was utter hubris and monumental stupidity on his part that caused this whole mess.
May's handling of the whole debacle is be questionable, but one should not discount the pester power of the screaming toddlers that make up the British government.
I firmly believe that the combined IQ of any committee is substantially below the level of it's dumbest member -20.
And the larger the group and the more diverse and opposing the viewpoints, the worse it gets.
I'm amazed they got the deal they got. Even though it has absolutely no chance whatsoever.
But no deal could ever have a chance, because there are enough factions that badly want it to fail and the only deal they will accept is no deal. Going the full "Rule Britannia", the whole Nelson, make Britian great again, etc...
Basically inbred nationalistic numbskulls.

McGiver

Leroy42 wrote:

And they never get pulled up on their dual position that the EU is a dictatorship run by a cabal of elites from which the UK has lost control and the seeming position that these very same autocrats will be forced to concede due to pressure from individual members.

This duality is typical for Europhobes, anti-EU populists and extremists. The EU is a universal scapegoat - Socialist conspiracy, USSR reincarnation conspiracy, neoliberal conspiracy, superstate conspiracy, unelected bureaucrat conspiracy, globalist conspiracy, Vatican conspiracy (this one is from the DUP founder

) etc. It is too weak and slow to act yet it is supposedly a dictatorship, which should be strong and fast by definition, but at the same time it should be more democratic, which we would make it even slower to act and "weaker", should be stronger, which would require more competencies and member states ceding more sovereignty, but at the same time allegedly demands too much competencies for itself... Whatever you want to blame our criticise about the EU there is always a way to do it, as an international organisation constantly in flux (presidency, EC, EP) it's an easy target. And the Tories and their press have mastered this blame game over three decades. The list of euro myths they produced in this period is astonishing.

Water John

Hope Hilary Benn's motion wins in Parliament on Tuesday. He has Chaired the all party committee and has them coming up with a unanomous position.

'One of these – tabled by Benn and with strong cross-party backing – calls both for the deal to be rejected and for parliament to rule out a no deal outcome. Senior MPs believe that if the Benn amendment is chosen by the speaker and voted on before the main motion, it could be passed, meaning the government motion would be superseded. The effect would be a double defeat for May, and narrow her options down, as she would not be able to proceed towards a no deal. Some senior MPs say this will make a second referendum more likely.' Guardian

CelticRambler

Gerry T wrote: »

It is good to have a brexiteer debate on here ...

I don't think RobMc59 is a brexiteer ...

J Mysterio wrote: »

I think this is an interesting point, and its certainty what the UK have strove for - a super particular tailored deal - but its what the EU want to avoid at all costs - and who can blame them?

I was thinking about it from the EU's point of view. They've already got the Swiss "pick-n-mix" deal that comes back to haunt relations every few years (e.g. most recently when the Swiss voted to "take back control" of migrant workers). Down south they've got Turkey that's been a difficult neighbour, but the kind you want to keep on speaking terms with; and now they've got the Brits.

Would it not make sense for the EU to design an "Awkward Feckers Trade Association" for these kinda-European-but-not countries, with its own starting-point treaty and an annex of costs and benefits for each opt-in (and cost and limitations for not opting-in). That would take a lot of the steam out of the Brexiteers' cakeist nonsense (or equivalent in other countries).

Gerry T

RobMc59 wrote:

THANK YOU-finally someone answers my question without the hysterical banshee like wailing of an EU acolyte !

It is good to have a brexiteer debate on here, we've have some very good contributors, but not enough of them. You'r prob mixing up business with the aviation industry which must have 50% ownership in the EU. Also car manufacturing which needs 55% of parts to be made in the EU for the car to qualify for EU free trade deals globally.
For those of us watching brexit for the last couple of yrs, it has become clear that from a financial perspective the UK will be damaged, how much no body really knows but it will hit people very hard. The other hits are harder to see, like travel through EU, delays etc. But the benefits, well there's none really. There's no real change in border or immigration and no one has ever listed the laws the ecj has implemented that would be removed.
So maybe you can debate the substantive issues, rather than one about an alcoholic drink, one which I love but is sadly declining in Ireland as young people's tastes change.
From your perspective, why don't the people of the UK demand a second ref to cancel brexit, get back in the EU, what's wrong with being in a club where all members prosper and help each other, giving to the less developed so they can grow faster and catch up....just like ireland did

Borderhopper

With all the talk of Guinness, Diageo, etc wtc, I don't think there has been any discussion on the effects on the NHS of a no deal Brexit. True, there has been talk of pharmaceuticals (of which the U.K. makes relatively little, and lacks capacity/licensing to produce their own, disregarding the economies of scale needed for drug production. Effects on staff have had some discussion.

But there are hidden services without which the NHS cannot function. This is not idle speculation, my area of expertise is laboratory diagnostics, more specifically blood transfusion. Almost all of the equipment/consumables we use in labs is supplied from EU countries, supplied through local/UK contractors. These are not easily replaced, if at all, from within the U.K. There are large facilities e.g. Roche Diagnostics, but these are mostly warehouses for goods from EU and some customer support.

It's these hidden things that almost preclude a no deal Brexit. Without diagnostics, there are no surgeries, maternity services, trauma provision and so on and so on. But unless you're in the industry, very little is discussed. Almost no planning is being undertaken to allow for no deal, as even hospital managers are ignorant to what is involved.

Until it goes wrong.

Leroy42

If, as is likely, the deal is voted down or postponed then TM has little option but to ask for further negotiations from the EU.

A lot will depend on the numbers. Currently it appears to be overwhelmingly rejected, therefore some tweaks will not be enough.

I think the EU will be open to further negotiation as they do not a no deal either. The problem is that the EU is under the same pressures that TM is, ie not to be seen to capitulate, and with issues like Italy, Hungary and Poland not to mention Greece will be looking on wondering why the UK is being bailed out whilst they were forced to suffer, any renogiation will need to be seen as gaining something for the EU.

So the UK want a unilateral position on the backstop. What are they prepared to give in return? Will they agree to pay for and maintain the border? Will they agree to help fund the costs that EU will bear so upgrading ports, roads etc.

(I am not suggesting any of that, just an example of what may be expected).

But all the talk in the UK is that the EU will fold at the last minute, TM simply needs to try harder and bang the table. This is even coming from Davis and Raab who were involved yet seem to have no solutions to offer. IDS was on Preston recently and he simply said that EU will do a better deal, because. He didn't elaborate (of course) or signify what the UK should look to concede or even that there was anything to concede.

They keep referring to Canada or other trade deals where they say that the EU gave it at the last minute. They don't mention Greece or Ireland where they very much didn't.

And they never get pulled up on their dual position that the EU is a dictatorship run by a cabal of elites from which the UK has lost control and the seeming position that these very same autocrats will be forced to concede due to pressure from individual members.

Enzokk

murphaph wrote: »

Her red lines. She could have told the truth in the beginning. She's about 40% responsible. Cameron can have the rest of the responsibility.

You are being generous to only give her 40% of the blame. I would go as far as 90% of the blame on her. Yes she chose to take up a very difficult challenge, but she has failed at every step along the way and Cameron is not to blame for that.

Enzokk

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I wouldn't put the blame entirely at May's door. She inherited a giant crock of sh*t and she somehow has to make it work. She isn't even in favour of Brexit.
She must sometimes feel like a teacher in kindergarten, trying to teach while the kids are out of control and yelling and throwing things.
Cameron left a giant turd on the carpet and she gets to clean it up. No matter how much shake'n'vac she uses, the smell will linger and the stain on the rug will never go away.

Is there any indications other than she campaigned for Remain that she doesn't want Brexit? I frame this question in the context that Jeremy Corbyn wants to leave the EU but he campaigned for Remain as well so her one speech in favour of staying in the EU doesn't mean she is a Remainer, only she will do and say what she thinks is appropriate for her political ambitions.

As for her not taking the entire blame, she chose the red lines, she chose to trigger article 50 before she knew what Brexit, they wanted, she chose to ignore the voice of Remainers during this whole process and she is the one that was in charge when the Home Office really became a hostile environment for immigrants (and UK citizens). She is the one that didn't guarantee the rights of EU citizens until very late in the negotiations, which would have been a goodwill gesture to the EU. She has referred to people as citizens of nowhere who believe they are part of the wider world and not just of where they were born and then just recently she referred to EU citizens who has made their lives in Brittain and enhanced (in the majority by a big margin I would say) as queue jumpers.

She is a xenophobe and probably a racist as well, she made all her troubles herself and now being a "very difficult woman" she will not back down. So if see her struggling to get her deal through and having to deal with politicians acting as children, she made her bed and there really isn't any reason to feel sorry for her. If you do, just read one or two articles of Amelia Gentleman on the Windrush scandal and you should feel contempt for the architect of the misery people have suffered.

https://www.theguardian.com/profile/ameliagentleman

murphaph

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I wouldn't put the blame entirely at May's door. She inherited a giant crock of sh*t and she somehow has to make it work. She isn't even in favour of Brexit.
She must sometimes feel like a teacher in kindergarten, trying to teach while the kids are out of control and yelling and throwing things.
Cameron left a giant turd on the carpet and she gets to clean it up. No matter how much shake'n'vac she uses, the smell will linger and the stain on the rug will never go away.

Her red lines. She could have told the truth in the beginning. She's about 40% responsible. Cameron can have the rest of the responsibility.