Brexit (Old)

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by lightmyfire

So I voted out. Not because I have any issues with any of the people in Europe but because I would prefer the MOD EDIT.in our Parliament control our destiny rather than those in Brussels. Worryingly though the standard of front bench politics (there are a lot of great back benchers of all parties) is the worse I have ever seen. What with these pathetic lot in power and no viable alternative I do worry about our future.

But the most frightening thing to me is the subliminal indoctrination that media/social media are ramming down our throats because it is against all of their interests for us to get out.

Totally agree that no one owes us anything in this world and it is going to be a tough slog.

BUT - as someone who studied Economics and how we labeled the Agricultural and Industrial revolutions maybe we are looking at the next phase, call it the Service Sector Revolution and maybe we should be pioneering in that.

p.s. some great comments on this thread by the way

We are pioneering in the service sector but without access to the EU single market and customs union this sector will not be as strong; as we're seeing with TV broadcasters like Discovery and investment banks like Citibank moving some of their operations out of the UK.

---------- Post added at 12:07 ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 ----------

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Meaningful vote on the 28 march ?

lol, I wouldn't be totally shocked if this was the case!

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s hardly my true colours to recognise the tainted history of our country. If we think we will go out to the world who will welcome us with open arms we have another thing coming.

As far as your posts go Germany is in it for itself, Macron is in it for himself, Varadkar is in it for himself.

Why won’t the rest of the world be in it for itself? Because it will bow to our Anglo-Saxon superiority?

Your misunderstanding appears to be that capitalism creates rational actors looking to achieve some kind of economic edge. Any collective involves sacrifice by some for a greater total gain. In our case the gain is easy access to a workforce our businesses rely upon and a market to sell goods into.

Germany is by far the biggest net contributor to the EU and you seem to think it should have less influence, yet we give Ireland a low interest loan and it should do our bidding? The inconsistencies are staggering.

Your incorrect inferences are insulting.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Your incorrect inferences are insulting.

Please specify which for clarity.

[denphone]

Sir John Major has criticised the “breathtaking ignorance” of hard Brexiters and self-described “unionists” over the Irish border and the backstop.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...b01d1e859e90ad

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-nor...sir-john-major

“We should never forget that the Troubles began in the 1960s with the murder of customs officials at the north-south border,” he told guests at the inaugural Albert Memorial lecture in Longford, Ireland.

Those who mock and disparage the backstop should reflect on the risks of destroying it and stop relying on uninvented fanciful alternatives that for now exist absolutely nowhere.

The reckless few ... are in a clear minority and for good reason.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Please specify which for clarity.

No need. Realms of the bleedin’ obvious.

Whilst I’m on, the British ‘tainted history’ to which you refer precedes the rather more recent tainted history of some other European countries. We abolished slavery before most others; our colonies up to the point of their release, were all left with roads, power, fresh water, administration and justice.

We are debating in this thread the release of the UK from the EU. Some might say that Brexit avoids a tainted future. I say that the way the EU is heading is anti-democratic and we would be well off being outside their structures.

[Dave42]

Downing Street says Brexit vote will be held before 21 January

https://news.sky.com/story/theresa-m...eline-11577620

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Dave42

Downing Street says Brexit vote will be held before 21 January

https://news.sky.com/story/theresa-m...eline-11577620

Just like they stated yesterday morning but then again the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing Dave.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

No need. Realms of the bleedin’ obvious.

Whilst I’m on, the British ‘tainted history’ to which you refer precedes the rather more recent tainted history of some other European countries. We abolished slavery before most others; our colonies up to the point of their release, were all leftvwithbroads, power, fresh water, administration and justice.

We are debating in this theead the release of the UK from the EU. Some might say that Brexit avoids a tainted future. I say that the way the EU is heading is anti-demicratic and we would be well off being outside their structures.

It isn’t obvious, and the fact you can’t present a single example indicates you may be exaggerating.

I’m not sure all of the colonies feel like our involvement benefited them to the degree you do. We continue to this day to engage in warfare, directly and indirectly, for our own financial interests. I’m sure the people of Yemen appreciate the manufacturing quality, and of course the British spirit of fair play, as the Saudis drop our bombs on them.

Europe has an embarrassing and tragic history, of which nobody can be proud. To claim we are somehow exempt from this is historical revisionism in the extreme.

Indeed, our “justice” didn’t extend to our closest neighbour in the crimes committed in Ireland. The UK government have been complicit in the murder of civilians and journalists - so do not dare suggest we are untainted by modern history as the evidence suggests otherwise.

---------- Post added at 13:04 ---------- Previous post was at 13:03 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

Just like they stated yesterday morning but then again the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing Dave.

There’s the date of the no confidence vote (if required).

[RichardCoulter]

It has been argued by Remainers that the existence of the EU has actually helped to prevent war as it would be very difficult to declare war on a fellow member!

Not sure what I think of the idea of an EU army, would this involve a new army being created and paid for by member states or would the existing armies of each country be transferred over to working for the EU? Would this be full or part time (like footballers working for their own club and playing for England). Would the EU have the final say over our troops?

Would the idea of having extra troops at our disposal make us safer? What are the main concerns of those who oppose this idea? Would it only be used to protect member states from outside forces or could it be used for situations like Iraq?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by jfman

It isn’t obvious, and the fact you can’t present a single example indicates you may be exaggerating.

I’m not sure all of the colonies feel like our involvement benefited them to the degree you do. We continue to this day to engage in warfare, directly and indirectly, for our own financial interests. I’m sure the people of Yemen appreciate the manufacturing quality, and of course the British spirit of fair play, as the Saudis drop our bombs on them.

Europe has an embarrassing and tragic history, of which nobody can be proud. To claim we are somehow exempt from this is historical revisionism in the extreme.

Indeed, our “justice” didn’t extend to our closest neighbour in the crimes committed in Ireland. The UK government have been complicit in the murder of civilians and journalists - so do not dare suggest we are untainted by modern history as the evidence suggests otherwise.

Britain has done some great things in his history of that there is no doubt but it tends to have 'historical amnesia' when when it comes to the country’s colonial past.

[heero_yuy]

Quote from RichardCoulter:


Would it only be used to protect member states from outside forces or could it be used for situations like Iraq?

Put down anti-EU riots more like.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

It has been argued by Remainers that the existence of the EU has actually helped to prevent war as it would be very difficult to declare war on a fellow member!

Not sure what I think of the idea of an EU army, would this involve a new army being created and paid for by member states or would the existing armies of each country be transferred over to working for the EU? Would this be full or part time (like footballers working for their own club and playing for England). Would the EU have the final say over our troops?

Would the idea of having extra troops at our disposal make us safer? What are the main concerns of those who oppose this idea? Would it only be used to protect member states from outside forces or could it be used for situations like Iraq?

A federal army only works if, like the USA, it has a federal chain of command.

If the EU makes this army before it politically federalises (like they did with the Euro), there will be the risk of 27 countries (or 28 if we remain) having different interests to protect.

Also, if we remain and eschew 'ever closer union' then we would also eschew being within the EU army structure; or would we? It would be a mess whether or not we remain.

I believe that the peace was kept not because of the EU but because of the sheer horror of what preceded it and the lack of need to go to war. I suppose it could be argued that the EEC (not the EU, though) provided a peaceable platform and I support that. It is the morph into the EU to which I object and particularly how Germany is top dog and their running dog, the French government, is tagging onto Germany's tail with a bark louder than their bite.

[RichardCoulter]

This video 'Leaked footage from inside 10 Downing Street' has been uploaded to YouTube:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjp5OmoDYQM

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by denphone

Britain has done some great things in his history of that there is no doubt but it tends to have 'historical amnesia' when when it comes to the country’s colonial past.

I don't think so. Colonial guilt prevails particularly when African countries play the colonial card.

As I said, we were first in abolition of slavery and we ran highly civilised administrations in our colonies especially when you view what many of them are like now.

I also remind that we took in the East African Asians in the 1970s when the post-colonial governments persecuted them and drove them out. India refused to take them. This is one of the great things that the UK has done in its history.

[techguyone]

I don't get why we need a Euro Army at all, we have NATO is this some way to avoid paying the NATO costs?