Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The battle of Brexit!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
    Then what was the point of holding it to begin with ?
    The point behind it was to attempt to blackmail the European Union into further concessions. It backfired.

    Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
    Now, i'm wondering what was the need for a deal to begin with ?
    The need for a deal can be found in the Peace Agreement for the Civil War in Northern Ireland, which without a deal (on open borders) the UK would blatantly violate.

    Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
    On the face of it i don't see a problem with WTO rules. It would be like how ever other non-EU country without an FTA deals with the EU.

    As far as the rest of the world & the UK is concerned, nothing changes.
    Virtually all trade agreements that other countries have in place for trade with the UK will cease to apply as they were negotiated with the EU. There is literally no country worldwide that deals solely on WTO rules.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by kato View Post
      The point behind it was to attempt to blackmail the European Union into further concessions. It backfired.
      I see, this puts a whole other spin on the rationale to break out. It means they never intended to quit.

      The need for a deal can be found in the Peace Agreement for the Civil War in Northern Ireland, which without a deal (on open borders) the UK would blatantly violate.
      Interesting, this means without a 3rd party ie EU the Good Friday talks has no chance of succeeding on solely a bilateral basis. I always found it strange how it worked out like magic after personally experiencing an IRA attack in Manchester only a few short years prior.

      Virtually all trade agreements that other countries have in place for trade with the UK will cease to apply as they were negotiated with the EU. There is literally no country worldwide that deals solely on WTO rules.
      Right, that is why parliament vetoed it.

      Ya, i'm starting too see why tankie is so cynical about it now. He genuinely wants out but that does not seem to be in the cards.
      Last edited by Double Edge; 02 Jun 19,, 17:16.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
        Then what was the point of holding it to begin with ?
        Well you have Freyr's and kato's view which may have played a small part but the real and main reason was because Cameron wanted to be elected (again-ish), his first term having being a coalition Government with the LibDems. So he ran on a vote regarding EU membership to take votes from UKIP and was returned with a majority - no coalition needed and indeed the LibDems got wiped out almost. Having chanced the Scottish referendum, which he said would end the question "for a generation" he wanted to end the EU question in the same way. They were actually in a way a brave Government and behaved responsibly to manage the debt and try to deal with these long time 'questions': They gave the LibDems a referendum on PR too I seem to recall. They did not bank on the use of illegal Muscovite money and bots etc in the EU referendum so failed. I think Cameron was a coward to resign but hope Osbourne will one day return to politics in the UK. Basically though it was about keeping the Tory Party together and taking votes from UKIP.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Freyr View Post
          Here's another Poll they conducted back in Dec - Jan

          NEW: Mega poll of 25,000 people by @YouGov for the @peoplesvote_uk campaign:

          Voting intention:

          CON 40%
          LAB 34
          LD 10
          UKIP 4
          Green 4

          Poll conducted among 25,537 people online, 21 Dec-4 Jan.
          It is not Dec - Jan now. People are allowed to change their minds and do!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by snapper View Post
            Well you have Freyr's and kato's view which may have played a small part but the real and main reason was because Cameron wanted to be elected (again-ish), his first term having being a coalition Government with the LibDems. So he ran on a vote regarding EU membership to take votes from UKIP and was returned with a majority - no coalition needed and indeed the LibDems got wiped out almost. Having chanced the Scottish referendum, which he said would end the question "for a generation" he wanted to end the EU question in the same way. They were actually in a way a brave Government and behaved responsibly to manage the debt and try to deal with these long time 'questions': They gave the LibDems a referendum on PR too I seem to recall. They did not bank on the use of illegal Muscovite money and bots etc in the EU referendum so failed. I think Cameron was a coward to resign but hope Osbourne will one day return to politics in the UK. Basically though it was about keeping the Tory Party together and taking votes from UKIP.
            Why do you insist on blaming the Russians for everything. We already know the largest contributor to Social media manipulation was Anglo- American companies data mining peoples likes and comments etc and steering them in a sinister manner. Most of them even now don't know the extent to which their accounts have been compromised. That isn't the Russians its Private intelligence companies sub-contracted by the Government or large corporations...
            I understand totally you're very wary of them due to their invasion of Ukrainian territory and now this chemical attack in Salisbury. But its not helping the debate to blame them for everything

            By the way I agree with your analysis above on everything else. I'm just questioning the Russian thing
            Last edited by Freyr; 02 Jun 19,, 19:31.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by snapper View Post
              It is not Dec - Jan now. People are allowed to change their minds and do!
              Actually the Brexit party didn't exist either so that sinks my boat ...lol ;-)

              Comment


              • Originally posted by kato View Post


                Virtually all trade agreements that other countries have in place for trade with the UK will cease to apply as they were negotiated with the EU. There is literally no country worldwide that deals solely on WTO rules.
                So Germany won't mind not having one?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by snapper View Post
                  Well you have Freyr's and kato's view which may have played a small part but the real and main reason was because Cameron wanted to be elected (again-ish), his first term having being a coalition Government with the LibDems. So he ran on a vote regarding EU membership to take votes from UKIP and was returned with a majority - no coalition needed and indeed the LibDems got wiped out almost. Having chanced the Scottish referendum, which he said would end the question "for a generation" he wanted to end the EU question in the same way. They were actually in a way a brave Government and behaved responsibly to manage the debt and try to deal with these long time 'questions': They gave the LibDems a referendum on PR too I seem to recall.
                  Way i've understood it was there was this internal dispute in the Tory party that had been raging for long that couldn't be resolved and the way to sort it out was bring it out in the public. Cameron banked on winning and weakening those that wanted out "for a generation". But things worked against him.

                  They did not bank on the use of illegal Muscovite money and bots etc in the EU referendum so failed.
                  No Russian diplomat has been expelled or Russia accused at least not for this reason. It's funny how this particular point never comes up in the UK media. France & Germany made it a point to show how they had successfully countered these efforts during their elections. All i can presume is it wasn't a factor in the UK otherwise they would not keep quiet. Suggesting otherwise is to imply the UK media is covering for Russia.

                  And at the same time you wonder why would the Russians give the UK a miss when they have their fingers in so many dirty pies already. Did they sense correctly that nothing was required or very little from their side given the UK would vote out on its own. They would then be better at figuring out the British public than Cameron ever was.

                  I think Cameron was a coward to resign but hope Osbourne will one day return to politics in the UK. Basically though it was about keeping the Tory Party together and taking votes from UKIP.
                  He caused this mess so isn't it fair he step down. In any case he would be unwilling to start the leave process and be suspect in his intention if he said otherwise.

                  Ultimately has Cameron helped keep the party together or weaken its chances "for a generation" ?
                  Last edited by Double Edge; 02 Jun 19,, 20:30.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Freyr View Post
                    So Germany won't mind not having one?
                    Not our decision, either way. That's a matter between the UK and the EU.

                    I don't think people on the island are quite aware of what's going on business-wise. It's not like German business will just cry foul and demand changes (like some Brexiteers pander it) or add some little surcharge to cover customs.

                    Our regional trade chamber currently recommends:
                    • limiting all contracts with British companies or individuals to Oct 31st, i.e. the Brexit date, given lack of confidence about the state of affairs after that date.
                    • moving business to markets other than the UK, citing in particular India and Russia as possible alternatives (... and offering to help you with that).
                    • checking all of your suppliers for British sources, and finding alternatives for those (... also offering to help you with that).
                    • calculating the future cost of procuring visa etc into any service contracts with British companies or individuals.
                    • including contract clauses that mandate adapting prices to current conditions (in particular exchange rates) at short intervals.
                    • looking into switching any transport from/to Irish business relations to routes not involving the UK.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by tankie View Post
                      I want what we voted for , out of the eu as promised by camoron , deals were not mentioned on the ballot paper , democracy is being killed by the few , if has had been promised we left none of this would be relevant , the leave vote won the remain didnt . Unlucky better luck next time and if the remoaners love the eu that much well im sure Germany will take them in .Kato will welcome them with open arms ,, or will he .and the plot thickens , hey DE if the losers cant accept the democratic vote and live by it then like i say europes a big.place ,, bigger than little England anyhoo .
                      a) our system of government works on consent so saying tough won't cut it.

                      b) Scots might opt out and do just what you said. Now, i don't know about you but the U in UK stands for united. I cannot believe Pro-brexit means breaking up the kingdom. This is absolutely the last kind of configuration a country wanting to go it alone needs.

                      c) was listening to a an Indian journalist based in the UK and her take was May was lacking in vision to take the country along. She couldn't unify the country when it needed it the most. All she wanted to do was party management. A failure of leadership. This is why in 2019 the country remains as embittered as it was back in 2016. Think about it. You need a Jacinda, not another Theresa! Get a true Brexiteer with a vision in office, not some incompetent.

                      You need a leader that can take people along, won't work any other way
                      Last edited by Double Edge; 05 Jun 19,, 00:58.

                      Comment


                      • A leader !! Exactly one that will accept and endorse what the majority voted for . May was and is always a remainer , 3 years of absolute BS waffle and lies , D E its a disuntied Queendom at the moment , the jocks want to leave , wales is pissed off , and we all know about Ireland ! A leader is indeed needed and after these EU mep elections it shows the ( new leader lol kof kof ) which way the country is telling the new leader to go , the tories are in meltdown over it as they are a majority of remain , gove is a turd , hunt is a 2 faced man , doris the same , I hope Farage can get on board with negotiations ( with all of the muscovite money they can throw at him , eh snapper ) which according to the eu saying there will be no more negs ! Politics is a joke now as the new Change uk has just had the newest jump ship party jumping ship again with 6 mp.s jumping as they got no mep seats but sourbury claiming they won ffs she is now in charge of sfa and she deserves it !! while the 6 are now sitting as independants who will no doubt back the remainer party and start licking boots n arses , ffs cant this bloody country do something right and do what we told them to do , there is a court case going on to prove we left on 29 march which we legally n lawfully did but the msm wont publish or let it out but will show with great glee the idiots protesting at Trumps visit whom I admire for his stance on his views on brexit , he said leave and dont pay them a cent etc etc ,imho the yanks have a cool president ! yes DE we need a leader right enough one with balls and not in a skirt lying her tits off for 3 years as the clock runs down to 2020 and the lisbon treaty .
                        Last edited by tankie; 05 Jun 19,, 10:41.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by tankie View Post
                          A leader !! Exactly one that will accept and endorse what the majority voted for .
                          ... that's the exact reverse of a "leader".

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by kato View Post
                            ... that's the exact reverse of a "leader".
                            Rolls eyes ,, BS but there again your used to being dictated to and wont understand democracy , but of course your leaders democracy consists of writing Mays { deal }in chequers ,, mein liebling May , zis iste das papier unt du biste vill be complyink ja oder du biste tote ,,, order of the 4th reich . De fuhrer ,,,zigg
                            Last edited by tankie; 05 Jun 19,, 20:55.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by tankie View Post
                              Rolls eyes ,, BS but there again your used to being dictated to and wont understand democracy , but of course your leaders democracy consists of writing Mays { deal }in chequers ,, mein liebling May , zis iste das papier unt du biste vill be complyink ja oder du biste tote ,,, order of the 4th reich . De fuhrer ,,,zigg
                              Please stop that nonsense right now, it's disgusting and unbecoming of a grown adult. Thank you.
                              “Never let yourself be persuaded that any one Great Man, any one leader, is necessary to the salvation of America. When America consists of one leader and 158 million followers, it will no longer be America.”
                              ― Dwight D. Eisenhower

                              Comment


                              • The EU negotiated with the US (under Obama) for 3 years in order to obtain a trade deal. The same result was achieved ..No deal! True to form it has dictated to the UK in the same manner (and thats before any trade deal is negotiated)The EU is incapable of accepting anything that falls outside its protectionist philosophy. Nothing can be negotiated because the EU is inward looking and all about control. Its a self absorbed political entity devoid of any sense of evolving into anything that is progressive. This narrow perspective is ultimately leading it into the financial abyss and all member states with it!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X