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

briany

Water John wrote: »

No one had said out of CU and SM completely during the Ref. Sure as Boris said they were for, 'having their cake and eating it'.

I think the EU made fairly clear that the Brexiteer pipe dream of having SM privileges without SM obligations was just that. In light of that, for May to deliver on the red lines of no FoM and independence of trade, she has to promise no SM or CU.

Problem with the ref is that the question was open to interpretation. A lot of Brexit voters seemed to think the SM and CU were one and the same as the EU, and that's just not true, but they won't accept that this isn't true, even though it's demonstrably true.

igCorcaigh wrote: »

The thing that worries me about this whole shambles is how it demonstrates that the EU is now a trap, and I'm not pro Brexit.

The UK's internal politics have played a huge part in how difficult negotiations have been. They trapped themselves, not the EU. Half of them don't even want to leave, and the half that did want to leave weren't too well-educated on what that actually entailed. That's before you even get to the issues with Northern Ireland and making good on the commitment of no hard border in Ireland.

If this were, say, Portugal, and they voted 60+ percent Leave, they'd already have sorted out the terms of withdrawal because that would be a country with no contentious borders and would have a convincing mandate.

igCorcaigh

If this is all a symptom of peoples' lack of trust of representitve democracy, then I really do fear for the worst.

Calina

RobMc59 wrote: »

Your ridiculing,belittling comments are probably best kept for the poppy thread,although if you grew up in a country that was in cahoots with Germany in WW1 and sent condolences following the death of Hitler-well maybe it's to be expected.
Of course Dunkirk was a defeat for Britain and France,17000 soldiers died there(mostly French) and it did as you point out prompt Churchill's fight them on the beaches speech to the country and parliament when Britain was effectively fighting alone.And as is quite often pointed out Britain is something of a "has been"in terms of world power-but sometimes it's better to be a has been than a never was.The attitude of I'd rather die on my feet than cowering on my knees is a choice countries have.

To be utterly blunt, this choice would not be necessary if countries live and let live and to be frank, the UK is absolutely not a country whose history could be described in terms. It has historically been extremely bellicose and it would be worth recognising it tended not to send thousands to defend itself, but to send thousands to invade ad conquer. The sun never setting on the British Empire is as much evidence of aggression and bellicosity as the invasions of 1914 and 1939. It isn't like Britain left Ireland alone, let's face it. And it has massive famines in Ireland and India as part of its record of glory as well. It was massively involved in the slave trade. Its colonial record is in many, many respects disgraceful.

I'd rather die in my bed having led a good life. There is no glory in attacking and invading countries. You want to die on your feet, don't imagine there's always glory in that either.

igCorcaigh

Water John wrote: »

The vast majority of EU citizens and countries, don't want a superstate, some in Brussels favour it. They simply need to be kept in check.

I would agree, yet those citizens on all these countries vote for their representatives who decide the future of the union.

Is there a disconnect? If so, then why can't democracy work on a pan European context?

Folkstonian

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The other countries are not trying to leave and have cake. That is the point here. The British have always had the most opt outs and veto's to protect themselves and their sense of superiority and separateness.

You are seeing Britain being taught a lesson here. Their stumbling arrogance can no longer protect them. That is a good thing for the EU as a whole imo.

Okay. I don’t actually know what much of what you post means. But it sounds good.

I think here you are confusing ‘superiority and separateness’ with working hard for a better deal in the interest of the country.

With the trend in public opinion steadily shifting towards remaining, I hope politicians snap back to their senses and continue to push for the best deal they can engineer inside the EU.

Please don’t deluded, however, yourself into thinking that Britain is the only EU country that tries to gain advantages over fellow members in certain areas whilst working in partnership in others. That’s how international relations works.

Water John

The vast majority of EU citizens and countries, don't want a superstate, some in Brussels favour it. They simply need to be kept in check.

igCorcaigh

The thing that worries me about this whole shambles is how it demonstrates that the EU is now a trap, and I'm not pro Brexit.

The Left have been traditionally anti EU, or at least sounding a warning about its destination.

Where now for the left when the right have taken that ground?

Will the EU superstate gather strength now, just as the political sphere splinters?

It's a worrying scenario for everyone really.

murphaph

RobMc59 wrote: »

Your ridiculing,belittling comments are probably best kept for the poppy thread,although if you grew up in a country that was in cahoots with Germany in WW1 and sent condolences following the death of Hitler-well maybe it's to be expected.
Of course Dunkirk was a defeat for Britain and France,17000 soldiers died there(mostly French) and it did as you point out prompt Churchill's fight them on the beaches speech to the country and parliament when Britain was effectively fighting alone.And as is quite often pointed out Britain is something of a "has been"in terms of world power-but sometimes it's better to be a has been than a never was.The attitude of I'd rather die on my feet than cowering on my knees is a choice countries have.

Now that's what I call a slipped mask.

Water John

A good leader would have taken time and gradually eroded the support for the Hard Brexiteers. Instead with her Florence speech, she put them centre stage.

No one had said out of CU and SM completely during the Ref. Sure as Boris said they were for, 'having their cake and eating it'.

briany

Folkstonian wrote: »

I’m sure you are right.

But being Prime Minister isn’t meant to be an easy gig.

I would expect any PM to have the moral courage to take a more considered and cautious in that scenario

You aren’t much good as a leader if you cannot demonstrate leadership

I'm not sure if it's possible to be a strong leader when you had parliament so split on the issue. A fault line that didn't run down the aisle, but through both of the main parties. This is the problem with Brexit in that parliament and public have been so divided that it's almost impossible to reach a consensus to build a leadership upon.

Also, the Euro-sceptic element of the Conservatives has existed since at least the signing of the Maastricht treaty. It's a political force that got Cameron to first go to the EU to ask for more concessions, and then to include a referendum in the 2015 manifesto. It's a political force that Cameron failed to defeat. The Euro-sceptics won the right to have a referendum, and then they were able to get that vote over the line. To suggest that May could get it under control now through strong leadership is hard to envisage, to say the least.

BonnieSituation

RobMc59 wrote: »

If in your simplified view of the UK everyone is either brain dead,a clone of JRM or Tommy Robinson then that opinion might be attractive.

I don't see how this nonsense marries with what I stated above.

RobMc59

BonnieSituation wrote: »

But France and Germany haven't exactly got the "benevolent" history with us that le Rosbif have.

And given that this collective clusterfūck is going to have a great effect on peace and prosperity of our island we're kinda allowed to begin to treat ye with the contempt that the UK deserves.

If in your simplified view of the UK everyone is either brain dead,a clone of JRM or Tommy Robinson then that opinion might be attractive.

road_high

tuxy wrote: »

So nothing to do with transport cost and speed then?

If they’re potentially wiped out by tariffs and pointless paperwork then no. Same argument can be made for the Uk itself but they’d rather trade with Outer Mongolia than the markets on their doorsteps. So they keep crowing anyhow

Rhineshark

Folkstonian wrote: »

Every country has opt outs in certain areas.

Every country votes in accordance with its own interests in the council and in the parliament.

Have you called out Germany for pushing extreme economic liberalism for the last few decades despite the deeply harmful impact this has had on many smaller, less wealthy member states?

Have you called out France for aggressively pursuing a protectionist economic policy despite a majority of member states publicly stating that this is not in their best interests?

If you are prepared to single out and vilify the U.K. whilst all other countries engage in the same activity, you are a xenophobe.

...You managed to accuse and disprove the "xenophobia" in the same sentence. "Xenophobia", being fear of others, would be far more likely to result in disliking them all rather than mocking the UK, with, afaik, the most opt-outs of any country for claiming it is hard done by.

"Anglophobia" is more what you'd be looking for and it is hardly anglophobia to point out the guys doing all the whining have the best deal tailored to their interests of anyone and are still complaining.

FrancieBrady

Folkstonian wrote: »

Every country has opt outs in certain areas.

Every country votes in accordance with its own interests in the council and in the parliament.

Have you called out Germany for pushing extreme economic liberalism for the last few decades despite the deeply harmful impact this has had on many smaller, less wealthy member states?

Have you called out France for aggressively pursuing a protectionist economic policy despite a majority of member states publicly stating that this is not in their best interests?

If you are prepared to single out and vilify the U.K. whilst all other countries engage in the same activity, you are a xenophobe.

The other countries are not trying to leave and have cake. That is the point here. The British have always had the most opt outs and veto's to protect themselves and their sense of superiority and separateness.

You are seeing Britain being taught a lesson here. Their stumbling arrogance can no longer protect them. That is a good thing for the EU as a whole imo.

tuxy

road_high wrote: »

It’s mainly laziness and inertia has us so reliant on uk trade

So nothing to do with transport cost and speed then?

road_high

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Interesting to read that the Cork-Santander ferry will now be a 12-month service - 2,500 freight units sounds relatively tiny, but evidently there's sufficient commercial demand and profit.

We need to increase trade with Europe and replace potentially volatile Uk imports. It’s mainly laziness and inertia has us so reliant on uk trade

Folkstonian

briany wrote: »

I don't think the Brexit-voting electorate, broadly speaking, had much patience for a period of dialog and preparation. The reason for this is that they had been greatly mislead when it came to the scope and complexity of negotiations, as well as the UK's negotiating position. They wanted the great things promised to them now. Not an indefinite period in the future. If May were to call for a 'preparation period', you can see how it's translated into 'stalling period' in certain eyes and ears.

I’m sure you are right.

But being Prime Minister isn’t meant to be an easy gig.

I would expect any PM to have the moral courage to take a more considered and cautious approach in that scenario

You aren’t much good as a leader if you cannot demonstrate leadership

RobMc59

Gerry T wrote: »

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

I agree with a lot of your post,I thought the purpose of a discussion was for people to talk about a subject willing to listen to different views and have a range of opinions rather than everyone singing from the same hymn sheet agreeing with each other.
It can be difficult if you don't comply with the generally accepted opinion and you may even be labelled as troll.Bizarrely this may be the case even if your views are broadly the same as everyone else's.

BonnieSituation

Folkstonian wrote: »

Every country has opt outs in certain areas.

Every country votes in accordance with its own interests in the council and in the parliament.

Have you called out Germany for pushing extreme economic liberalism for the last few decades despite the deeply harmful impact this has had on many smaller, less wealthy member states?

Have you called out France for aggressively pursuing a protectionist economic policy despite a majority of member states publicly stating that this is not in their best interests?

If you are prepared to single out and vilify the U.K. whilst all other countries engage in the same activity, you are a xenophobe.

But France and Germany haven't exactly got the "benevolent" history with us that le Rosbif have.

And given that this collective clusterfūck is going to have a great effect on peace and prosperity of our island we're kinda allowed to begin to treat ye with the contempt that the UK deserves.

Professor Moriarty

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.

I think they've been very divided in their commitment to the EU project at best. If their press and some of their politicians are anything to go by, they see the EU as an intrusive and ludicrous institution. This has played out in the UK's attitude and approach to the the EU.

BonnieSituation

RobMc59 wrote: »

Your ridiculing,belittling comments are probably best kept for the poppy thread,although if you grew up in a country that was in cahoots with Germany in WW1 and sent condolences following the death of Hitler-well maybe it's to be expected.
Of course Dunkirk was a defeat for Britain and France,17000 soldiers died there(mostly French) and it did as you point out prompt Churchill's fight them on the beaches speech to the country and parliament when Britain was effectively fighting alone.And as is quite often pointed out Britain is something of a "has been"in terms of world power-but sometimes it's better to be a has been than a never was.The attitude of I'd rather die on my feet than cowering on my knees is a choice countries have.

As a constituent part of the UK we were definitely "a has been". But a lot of us kinda got tired of that.

Folkstonian

FrancieBrady wrote: »

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

Every country has opt outs in certain areas.

Every country votes in accordance with its own interests in the council and in the parliament.

Have you called out Germany for pushing extreme economic liberalism for the last few decades despite the deeply harmful impact this has had on many smaller, less wealthy member states?

Have you called out France for aggressively pursuing a protectionist economic policy despite a majority of member states publicly stating that this is not in their best interests?

If you are prepared to single out and vilify the U.K. whilst all other countries engage in the same activity, you are a xenophobe.

dr.fuzzenstein

Leroy42 wrote: »

Boris Johnson has said this morning that he will take personal responsibility for any job losses stemming from a no deal Brexit (not sure what that really means!)

Wow, we have moved a long way from €350m pw for the NHS and a whole world of trade deals and a bright future. JRM is talking about 50 years before any advantages.

Good grief.

For starters everything he said that lead up to Brexit should be printed out and fed to him.
This is akin to him admitting it was all a scam.
His personal responsibility means less than fcuk all, it won't help anyone who loses out because of his (and the others of his ilk) lies and deception.

Hurrache

RobMc59 wrote: »

if you grew up in a country that was in cahoots with Germany in WW1

What?

RobMc59

Sam Russell wrote: »

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.

Your ridiculing,belittling comments are probably best kept for the poppy thread,although if you grew up in a country that was in cahoots with Germany in WW1 and sent condolences following the death of Hitler-well maybe it's to be expected.
Of course Dunkirk was a defeat for Britain and France,17000 soldiers died there(mostly French) and it did as you point out prompt Churchill's fight them on the beaches speech to the country and parliament when Britain was effectively fighting alone.And as is quite often pointed out Britain is something of a "has been"in terms of world power-but sometimes it's better to be a has been than a never was.The attitude of I'd rather die on my feet than cowering on my knees is a choice countries have.

breatheme

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Interesting to read that the Cork-Santander ferry will now be a 12-month service - 2,500 freight units sounds relatively tiny, but evidently there's sufficient commercial demand and profit.

Living in Spain, that makes me happy.

briany

Folkstonian wrote: »

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

I don't think the Brexit-voting electorate, broadly speaking, had much patience for a period of dialog and preparation. The reason for this is that they had been greatly mislead when it came to the scope and complexity of negotiations, as well as the UK's negotiating position. They wanted the great things promised to them now. Not an indefinite period in the future. If May were to call for a 'preparation period', you can see how it's translated into 'stalling period' in certain eyes and ears.

An Ciarraioch

Interesting to read that the Cork-Santander ferry will now be a 12-month service - 2,500 freight units sounds relatively tiny, but evidently there's sufficient commercial demand and profit.

Leroy42

Boris Johnson has said this morning that he will take personal responsibility for any job losses stemming from a no deal Brexit (not sure what that really means!)

Wow, we have moved a long way from €350m pw for the NHS and a whole world of trade deals and a bright future. JRM is talking about 50 years before any advantages.

Good grief.