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 X (Please read OP before posting)

johnnyskeleton

This is the tenth incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread, so Ive copied ACDs comments from the last thread to here. Same warnings etc still apply:

As we are approaching the critical end of March October 2019 period, please bear the following in mind before posting:
Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Inquitus

Supreme court verdict rally next week.

VinLieger

quokula wrote: »

He did answer it - he said they would negotiate an EFTA style deal (he didn't say EFTA but all the elements basically add up to something like that), and that they would have a referendum between that deal and remain, at which point the people will decide. The type of deal they want to negotiate has been their consistent position from the beginning, and the second referendum has always been part of their policy with the only question being about sequencing. The UK media has repeatedly misrepresented Labour's position throughout. Just because it is nuanced and can't be reduced to a catchy slogan.

The second referendum has only been part of their policy since last years conference when Corbyn got overruled by the membership and still it took him several months to actually come out and confirm it.

Rjd2

Peregrinus wrote: »

Can we really say the worst ever, while Teresa May and Boris Johnson still draw breath?

None of May, Johnson or Cameron are worse PMS than Blair.

Blair did good things, but ultimately his role in Iraq an illegitimate war was responsible for so many deaths and its effects are still been felt in 2019 and it cancels out his good deeds domestically.

Brexit is a ****show and if it happens which thankfully I feel it won't, will cause a lot of pain, but its not going to rival the horror of the Iraq war.

Corbyn isn't exactly perfect, but to his credit his foreign policy views are actually pretty sensible. Swinson I like was rambling like a neocon about Venezuela regime change the other day ffs.

Joe_ Public

I agree with Ian Dunt's take on all this.

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1174314709849432070

quokula

VinLieger wrote: »

The second referendum has only been part of their policy since last years conference when Corbyn got overruled by the membership and still it took him several months to actually come out and confirm it.

You're right, it's only been explicit policy since last year, though he was talking about the idea in 2017

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-01/corbyn-heads-to-portugal-as-u-k-labour-develops-ties-with-eu

But the thrust of their position, a deal with the closest ties possible to the EU while honouring the referendum has long been set. Which is by far the best situation for Ireland and the rest of Europe, though you can certainly argue in the UK that it would be pointless as things would basically be the same except they'd lost their influence.

Their support for a second referendum came later (though still some time ago now) as Theresa May's red lines were hardened and the country had become more polarised, making it harder for the sensible middle ground option.

quokula

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I agree with Ian Dunt's take on all this.

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1174314709849432070

Similar (though less hard line) sentiment in this article:

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-remainers-can-no-longer-take-yes-for-an-answer-11790224

If you're a British remainer and you put aside any irrational prejudice and look at the actual policy, Labour are basically giving you everything you could possibly reasonably ask for.

listermint

Rjd2 wrote: »

None of May, Johnson or Cameron are worse PMS than Blair.

Blair did good things, but ultimately his role in Iraq an illegitimate war was responsible for so many deaths and its effects are still been felt in 2019 and it cancels out his good deeds domestically.

Brexit is a ****show and if it happens which thankfully I feel it won't, will cause a lot of pain, but its not going to rival the horror of the Iraq war.

Corbyn isn't exactly perfect, but to his credit his foreign policy views are actually pretty sensible. Swinson I like was rambling like a neocon about Venezuela regime change the other day ffs.

Iraq war is a big optics game amongst most people on the Internet. A big fat flag to sit under.

Blairs goverments oversay the biggest lift felt across the board by the british public in decades. It was a golden era in the country where all boats were lifted.

Hanging coats on a war to overshadow nearly 2 decades of prosperity is nonsense. Wars do happen and yes it should not have happened but it did.

Deleting all of the massive gains that the average punter got during that time is very questionable. I always look on blanket statements like 'but the iraq war' with suspicion.

Joe_ Public

listermint wrote: »

Iraq war is a big optics game amongst most people on the Internet. A big fat flag to sit under.

Blairs goverments oversay the biggest lift felt across the board by the british public in decades. It was a golden era in the country where all boats were lifted.

Hanging coats on a war to overshadow nearly 2 decades of prosperity is nonsense. Wars do happen and yes it should not have happened but it did.

Deleting all of the massive gains that the average punter got during that time is very questionable. I always look on blanket statements like 'but the iraq war' with suspicion.

"Lifted all boats." Hmm, i'm not so sure about that. The regime that was famously "relaxed about people getting filthy rich" was also one in which inequality in British society grew sharply throughout its longish reign. I think there is definitely a case to be made for the claim that the vote to leave, while its roots surely precede the arrival of blairism by at least a generation, was certainly fomented all the time he was in charge.

lawred2

listermint wrote: »

Iraq war is a big optics game amongst most people on the Internet. A big fat flag to sit under.

Blairs goverments oversay the biggest lift felt across the board by the british public in decades. It was a golden era in the country where all boats were lifted.

Hanging coats on a war to overshadow nearly 2 decades of prosperity is nonsense. Wars do happen and yes it should not have happened but it did.

Deleting all of the massive gains that the average punter got during that time is very questionable. I always look on blanket statements like 'but the iraq war' with suspicion.

as if Tories would have done any different

First Up

listermint wrote:

Deleting all of the massive gains that the average punter got during that time is very questionable. I always look on blanket statements like 'but the iraq war' with suspicion.

Nobody is deleting the gains but the consequences of Blair's disastrous decisions on Iraq are far from finished.

To the chaos in the Middle East, you can add the chaos and re-radicalisation of the Labour Party, including first choosing the wrong Miliband (leading to a Tory win and the Brexit referendum), then choosing the unelectable Corbyn (leading to totally ineffective opposition to Brexit.)

Blair and the repulsive Alastair Campbell should be in jail for Iraq but they also carry much of the blame for the UK's descent into chaos since.

Joe_ Public

quokula wrote: »

Similar (though less hard line) sentiment in this article:

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-remainers-can-no-longer-take-yes-for-an-answer-11790224

If you're a British remainer and you put aside any irrational prejudice and look at the actual policy, Labour are basically giving you everything you could possibly reasonably ask for.

I read Lewis Goodall's book a few weeks back. Wasnt expecting much from it tbh, and starts off with him praising Blair to the hilt (as he got into journalism on the back of a scheme implemented by New Labour). Have to say, though, it developed into a rather good insight into how the party historically got to the point it is now at and was more than fair to Corbyn and every other leader. A lot of good sense written in that article imo.

farmchoice

First Up wrote: »

Nobody is deleting the gains but the consequences of Blair's disastrous decisions on Iraq are far from finished.

To the chaos in the Middle East, you can add the chaos and re-radicalisation of the Labour Party, including first choosing the wrong Miliband (leading to a Tory win and the Brexit referendum), then choosing the unelectable Corbyn (leading to totally ineffective opposition to Brexit.)

Blair and the repulsive Alastair Campbell should be in jail for Iraq but they also carry much of the blame for the UK's descent into chaos since.

and its not like this is all a case of hindsight being 20/20. at the time there was a cacophony of protest at the decision to go to war on what was even then obviously dodgy and disputed intelligence.
millions marched principled politicians resigned and less principled saw that not only was it morally wrong it was the middle east so principles aside it would probably turn out very badly anyway and still blair barrelled ahead.

quokula

lawred2 wrote: »

as if Tories would have done any different

When the Iraq war comes up it's often forgotten that it was overwhelmingly supported across both main parties at the time, and of course it was primarily an American exercise that would have happened with or without the UK.

It is often written off as some kind of Tony Blair personal project these days and if not for him everything would have been fine.

Strazdas

First Up wrote: »

Nobody is deleting the gains but the consequences of Blair's disastrous decisions on Iraq are far from finished.

To the chaos in the Middle East, you can add the chaos and re-radicalisation of the Labour Party, including first choosing the wrong Miliband (leading to a Tory win and the Brexit referendum), then choosing the unelectable Corbyn (leading to totally ineffective opposition to Brexit.)

Blair and the repulsive Alastair Campbell should be in jail for Iraq but they also carry much of the blame for the UK's descent into chaos since.

A Tory PM would have backed George Bush 100%....you could argue the Iraq fiasco would have happened no matter what, not unless Labour had had a left wing, anti-war PM.

Zubeneschamali

Strazdas wrote: »

you could argue the Iraq fiasco would have happened no matter what, not unless Labour had had a left wing, anti-war PM.

Which is one of the reasons we now have Corbyn instead of a Blairite.

First Up

farmchoice wrote: »

and its not like this is all a case of hindsight being 20/20. at the time there was a cacophony of protest at the decision to go to war on what was even then obviously dodgy and disputed intelligence.
millions marched principled politicians resigned and less principled saw that not only was it morally wrong it was the middle east so principles aside it would probably turn out very badly anyway and still blair barrelled ahead.

Yes, a bit like Brexit really...…..

Strazdas

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Which is one of the reasons we now have Corbyn instead of a Blairite.

The UK has had very few Corbyns though. Chances are they were always going to invade Iraq in 2003 once Bush had made up his mind, no matter who the PM was.

quokula

farmchoice wrote: »

and its not like this is all a case of hindsight being 20/20. at the time there was a cacophony of protest at the decision to go to war on what was even then obviously dodgy and disputed intelligence.
millions marched principled politicians resigned and less principled saw that not only was it morally wrong it was the middle east so principles aside it would probably turn out very badly anyway and still blair barrelled ahead.

Exactly 2 politicians resigned. The vast majority of Labour and Conservatives voted for it (actually it was a higher percentage of Tories than Labour, because Labour had the rump of people like Corbyn who were against it), and the media were banging the drum in favour too.

It was not Tony Blair and Tony Blair alone, it was the entire British establishment who wanted it to go ahead. Many of those MPs are still in parliament today, on both sides of the aisle, though it suits them to pin it all on Blair.

There were of course protests, but those protesters were dismissed as the loony left even though they were on the right side of history, just as people like Corbyn continue to be treated in the media today.

ElectronVolt

Just watching Sky News there and there's yet another commentator seemingly of the opinion that Ireland needs to turn itself inside out to facilitate a smooth Brexit.

It's as if the debate just hasn't moved on at all in the UK. The wheels are turning but they're going nowhere.

JeffKenna

quokula wrote: »

Exactly 2 politicians resigned. The vast majority of Labour and Conservatives voted for it (actually it was a higher percentage of Tories than Labour, because Labour had the rump of people like Corbyn who were against it), and the media were banging the drum in favour too.

It was not Tony Blair and Tony Blair alone, it was the entire British establishment who wanted it to go ahead. Many of those MPs are still in parliament today, on both sides of the aisle, though it suits them to pin it all on Blair.

There were of course protests, but those protesters were dismissed as the loony left even though they were on the right side of history, just as people like Corbyn continue to be treated in the media today.

Tony Blair lied about weapons of mass destruction in order to influence MP's so I would certainly pin it on Blair.

Zubeneschamali

Deleted User wrote: »

Such meddling for what.

George W. Bush got a 10% boost in the polls for starting the war, and 10% again when Saddam Hussein was captured.

First Up

quokula wrote:

It is often written off as some kind of Tony Blair personal project these days and if not for him everything would have been fine.

The UK's involvement was very much a Tony Blair personal project.

Bush would very likely have gone ahead anyway with the same disastrous results. But that would not have included the collateral damage to the UK's political system which has directly resulted in Brexit.

briany

Deleted User wrote: »

It was Iraq and Libya and everything since that caused the refugee crisis and subsequent rise of the right across Europe leading to Brexit. Such meddling for what.

The U.S. : Let's destabilise the Middle East and North Africa.

Also the U.S.: Wow, the Middle East is a s**tshow. Why do people there hate us so much? Let's try more drone strikes, and more money to Israel and Saudi to fix this problem.

The U.S, as well: Lol. Nice migrant/'refugee' crisis ya got there, Europe. What? Take in some of these migrants? Why? Is it our fault their country's on fire? I think not.

eire4

briany wrote: »

The U.S. : Let's destabilise the Middle East and North Africa.

Also the U.S.: Wow, the Middle East is a s**tshow. Why do people there hate us so much? Let's try more drone strikes, and more money to Israel and Saudi to fix this problem.

The U.S, as well: Lol. Nice migrant/'refugee' crisis ya got there, Europe. What? Take in some of these migrants? Why? Is it our fault their country's on fire? I think not.

All so very true and the same could be siad about the issues in central American in places like Honduras which they destroyed when they helped over throw the democratically elected Manuel Zelaya and replace him with a US backed
far right government which has been carrying out killings and other human rights abuses with impunity and completely destabilized Honduras leading to the large number of Hondurans trying to flee north.

Rjd2

JeffKenna wrote: »

Tony Blair lied about weapons of mass destruction in order to influence MP's so I would certainly pin it on Blair.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/06/iraq-inquiry-key-points-from-the-chilcot-report

Don't forget the Chilcot report which was damning on Blair a few years ago.

Chilcot was not exactly a Corbynite as he was as establishment as you can get, heck Blair knighted him!

That's what made it even more cutting.

On the Iraq war, I don't think its fair to suggest the opponents of it were portrayed as the "loony left",,,the daily mail opposed it as did plenty of Labour heavyweights like Cook and Mo who was not an MP at the time.

Then their was the marches.

Never been accountability for it, the neo-cons who supported it in America have survived either due to Trump hiring them or reinventing themselves (Boot and Kristol) while Campbell's career has never had a dip.

Bannasidhe

Leroy42 wrote: »

Tbf, it appears Cameron and the Tories regret having anything to do with Cameron and the Tories.

It appears as if the Queen is regretting having anything to do with Cameron and the Tories.

briany

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It appears as if the Queen is regretting having anything to do with Cameron and the Tories.

Since Johnson has demonstrated little shame thus far, I wonder would the idea of besmirching the Queen's honour bring him 'round?

Professor Moriarty

briany wrote: »

Since Johnson has demonstrated little shame thus far, I wonder would the idea of besmirching the Queen's honour bring him 'round?

One thing that he has proven so far - he's no Churchill.

MarinersBlues

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

briany wrote: »

Since Johnson has demonstrated little shame thus far, I wonder would the idea of besmirching the Queen's honour bring him 'round?

One thing that he has proven so far - he's no Churchill.

Inherently racist.
Massive superiority complex - particularly on the international stage.
Happy to let the poor people suffer for his ideological agenda.
Refusal to take responsibility for any wrongdoing/ offensive behaviour.

if Johnson gassed some Russians he'd be pretty much there!

robindch

bilston wrote: »

What the hell went in whatever strategy meeting the DUP leadership had to determine which side to back in the Referendum?

The DUP's MP's and members do include a disappointingly high number of creationists, anti-abortionists and flat-earthers, so it's not much of a leap to suspect the same would disapprove of new-fangled things like the EU too.

Certainly, following last year's GE, the lure of political power seems to have captured the DUP's imagination and, like most political parties, happily chose to exchange political power now for influence, and perhaps existence, in the future.