Post-Brexit Thread - Page 83

ntluser · 17-07-2016, 14:24

The problem with all these votes and referendums is that you cannot rely on the campaigning politicians to tell you the truth as they all have their own agendas.

I'm hoping that the Brexit free trade deals are good enough to keep Scotland in the UK but out of the EU. Indirect trading with the EU via Canada seems to offer the best of both worlds.

I also hope that such deals equally satisfy Wales and Northern Ireland who are also important players in this equation.

denphone · 17-07-2016, 14:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

As far as relocating the sub base in the event of independence devonport would be the likely place with temporary use of US facilities if needed.

About 2 miles away from me old boy in the unlikelihood of Scotland gaining independence.

ntluser · 17-07-2016, 14:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

About 2 miles away from me old boy in the unlikelihood of Scotland gaining independence.

I suppose the positives are that you would have your own nuclear deterrent and have base staff contributing into your local economy.

The negative is that in the event of war/conflict etc. the base will be high on the strategic target destruction list and the subject of any subsequent bombardment.

**Chris** · 17-07-2016, 15:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by ntluser

I suppose the positives are that you would have your own nuclear deterrent and have base staff contributing into your local economy.

The negative is that in the event of war/conflict etc. the base will be high on the strategic target destruction list and the subject of any subsequent bombardment.

Devonport would be a primary target regardless of the presence of a nuclear sub base. Glasgow, Clydebank and the lower Clyde are all targets as well, regardless of the presence of Trident at Faslane, and an air burst nuclear strike on any or all of them would vaporise Helensburgh and district anyway.

The argument against nuclear weapons based on proximity to civilians is entirely bogus.

17-07-2016, 15:23

If things get that bad nukes are used we are all screwed there are no safe areas of the UK so not something that needs too much worrying about. There is no real strength or bargaining power over faslane and the SNP know it so they will concentrate on other areas. I do find it a bit amusing that Nicola Sturgeon constantly talks about how Scotland's democratic vote in the referendum has to be accommodated and respected then talks about blocking brexit completely disrespecting the democratic vote of the majority.

Being honest I love Scotland and most of the Scottish people but I'm fed up of the whole independence thing hanging over everyone's heads and knowing the SNP can and will spit the dummy anytime they don't like something. I'd be in favour of Scotland going it's own way now and the rest of union restructure rather then have a situation where one part of the UK can constantly create tension and uncertainty. Feeling towards Scotland after the last independence referendum became more hostile and I'd hate it to get to the point where there was hate involved so would rather we part while relations are more positive then negative.

denphone · 17-07-2016, 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by ntluser

I suppose the positives are that you would have your own nuclear deterrent and have base staff contributing into your local economy.

The negative is that in the event of war/conflict etc. the base will be high on the strategic target destruction list and the subject of any subsequent bombardment.

We don't even think about having the military base close by as there has been nuclear submarines going in there for refits for a pretty long time already so we have never been concerned by anything nuclear personally.

ntluser · 17-07-2016, 16:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

We don't even think about having the military base close by as there has been nuclear submarines going in their for refits for a pretty long time already so we have never been concerned by anything nuclear personally.

I think we are probably all hoping that no government is ever stupid enough to use nuclear weapons as the effects of the original atomic bomb explosions broadcast on TV many years ago were bad enough but today's nuclear weapons carry a much bigger payload with a much more devastating effect.

**Chris** · 17-07-2016, 17:57

The whole point is that they're unusable. Deterrence - if they are used, the doctrine which led to their development has failed.

17-07-2016, 19:02

Quote:

EU migrants who come to the UK as Brexit nears may not be given the right to stay, David Davis has said.
The new Brexit secretary told Sky News there might have to be a cut-off point if there was a "surge" in new arrivals.
But he said setting a date now could in itself prompt a "rush" of people moving before any deadline - and any steps must be compatible with EU law.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36819532

The EU need to confirm along with the UK that the right to stay in the UK has ended along with the all other rights of EU citizens as soon as A50 is triggered

Hom3r · 17-07-2016, 20:53

The upside to this when she fails she will have to resign and fall in to the Nicola who! bracket

Anypermitedroute · 17-07-2016, 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36819532

The EU need to confirm along with the UK that the right to stay in the UK has ended along with the all other rights of EU citizens as soon as A50 is triggered

But it also works both way, 1.8 million Brits live and work abroad,

Whilst the Vienna convention is not cast in stone I don't think it would be in britains interest to show a max exodus of EU migrants back to the continent doesn't exactly look good for business and as the European court of human rights will still be valid so expect lengthy delays whilst people have legitimately settled and bought homes fight for their right to stay.

Rules apply until we actually leave otherwise expect all the expat retirees coming back from Spain putting drain on the NHS who haven't paid in for years

nomadking · 17-07-2016, 21:48

But the British abroad tend to be the ones with money compared to the dross we have to put up with from the EU, eg one-legged Romanian roofers, family of 24 from Czech Republic with only one working.

MalteseFalcon · 17-07-2016, 22:15

Oh ffs, does the Brexit not mean we can leave that stupid Human Rights crap?

Ignitionnet · 17-07-2016, 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkC1984

Oh ffs, does the Brexit not mean we can leave that stupid Human Rights crap?

Leaving the EU means we can drop the ECHR, I presume that's what you meant by 'human rights crap', without it affecting our EU membership.

Personally I'd rather we didn't as I don't for a second trust the Tories or Labour to properly replace it given their recent records, though your mileage may vary.

---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:45 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

But the British abroad tend to be the ones with money compared to the dross we have to put up with from the EU, eg one-legged Romanian roofers, family of 24 from Czech Republic with only one working.

Weirdly these are the same 'dross' that people complain are taking 'their' jobs. Go figure.

Anypermitedroute · 17-07-2016, 22:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkC1984

Oh ffs, does the Brexit not mean we can leave that stupid Human Rights crap?

You mean that "stupid" system which protects people allowance of freedom of speech, ensures gay people are not persecuted and ensures everyone gas a right to fair trial, and protection of compensation to thalidomide victims amongst other items?

Sorry, but you will still be in it and British judges will still need to interprete the rulings based on this