You're aware Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister are satires, right?
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Why do you think I added "they even joke about it" to that post? However lets be clear. The UK has never been a big EU project fan and they have far less incentive now for being so since they are leaving
Farage isn't a problem for the EU. He turns up every few months to have a rant, collect his pay cheque and expenses and hardly bothers voting. He's a problem for the UK for sure. When will the leavers realise they've been conned?
He doesn't need to be, if May falls and the Tories elect a new Brexiteer PM then everything JRM has said could come to pass through the Government vetoing everything the EU tries to do... one positive that might come out of it is that it may well speed up the EU's acceptance of majority voting?
It is of course JRM/ERG's version of 'sabre-rattling' for when the A50 process is revoked. Up to now we have seen how the disgruntled remain resistance has operated in succeeding in thwarting the ERG's plans; this is a taste of what to expect from disgruntled Leavers when they fully realise they have been shafted and begin their guerrilla campaign.
The warning is for the EU though, not the UK, and it might only come about if Theresa is replaced by such as Boris. It is the first shots in the post (failed) Brexit political 'trench warfare' that will grip the UK and the EU, at least until the next GE scheduled in 2022
Tin hats at the ready!
You have 2 hands for a reason
Yeah I know, but I prefer if the UK projects that it is more EU friendly than it has been in previous years. It would bode well for chances of remaining or at the very least give the EU a reason to remain lenient towards us.
North Somerset is a fairly typical Tory safe seat. I did not realise that it had voted remain which as you say makes his position rather at odds with his constituency.
Why am I not surprised.
And military.... What do you mean.
While we have been in the EU we have had extremely close cooperation with Germany, Italy and Spain. We jointly developed the Tornado and Typhoon with our European partners and these have been extremely successful programmes managed by consortium's and government agencies made up from these nations.
Moreover, the UK has been working very closely with the French on joint military exercises.
Is that not good enough?
I am referring to the EU army. For some strange reason the UK is obsessed in seeing the EU being tied to the hip with the US on that regard. That despite the US had all but caused wars in the past few decades and so.
Yeah I don’t get this either. Apparently to many people it’s better to be independent on paper but under vassalage to the Americans, than to be a key decision maker in a European force.
I see nothing wrong about close co-operation with the US. However we need to stop being naive and think that the US will always have our best interest at heart. Voters preferences change, the US sits in a different continent to ours and what hurts us doesn't necessary hurts them and viceversa. For example they don't mind causing all sort of mischief in the ME simply because they won't be hit by waves upon waves of asylum seekers. Yet we sit right in that neighbourhood and a war against 'terror' in Iraq or Libya will mean we'll get the migrants and they'll probably get the huge contracts that follow.
We need to be prepared for the worse. We can't have a US president threatening our security simply because Germany signed a contract which is not in the US interest or we're not playing to the US tunes anymore. That's stupid. No continent outsource their military responsibility to a country which isn't even in that same continent.
As long as they obey the rules I have no problem with giving the UK unrestricted access to the single market up until they get their shit sorted. However A Euro sceptic UK with no intentions of remaining in the EU inside the EU is dangerous. They have no incentive to see the EU project to succeed and will use their VETO to curry favour with anyone whose hostile to a group they won't be belonging to in a year or two time
the problem isn't Farage but the VETO. Believe it or not, the EU gives real power to the individual countries. God forbid if we have a reluctant member who would use its veto in any way possible to curry favour to future trade partners.
The US have never had our best interests at heart, and it’s long overdue that people stop believing anything that naive. Nations care about their own interests and everything else is always going to be secondary to that.
well tbf the US has been a friend for Europe most of the time. However as you said their national interest will always come first. For example I'd love to see Europe having a decent relationship with Russia. First of all they are our neighbours and as neighbours we share similar challenges and concerns. Secondly Russia had been, for most of the time, an ally to Europe having stopped Napoleon and then Hitler in their tracks. Things only changed when the Georgian came in power, a brute who caused as much misery to Europe as he did to Russia itself. Finally Russia is rich with natural resources, its usually a friend to another financial and military juggernaut (ie China) and is one of the very few countries which can go toe to toe with the US which is a good thing in case its become less of a friend and more of a bully.
That will never happen if we're tied to the hip with the US.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Jesus fecking Christ
Is Theresa still meeting with Jeremy? It's all gone quiet compared to the last few days. They need to come up with something otherwise we're about a week away from calamity!
No Nicola, we all know we can’t do any of the things that JRM claims in his empty threat and so do you, you disingenuous cnut. Wish you and the SNP would feck off. Campaign to keep the UK in the EU and then use the same second referendum precendent to campaign to take the Scotland out of the UK. Absolute charlatan.
What? They met yesterday for 4 hours!
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I thought they weren't finished, maybe I haven't been reading closely enough.
Even without a 2nd referendum, Scotland would be justified in holding another indy ref, they remained because one of the biggest benefits was being an EU member. This is now being taken away from them, despite the country voting to remain.
If they are the type that would have voted UKIP then it's not a real loss.
Hey!
It's because the EU elections in the UK are so low in turnout that UKIP got voted in as MEPs in the first place. 64.6% didn't vote in 2014.
According to the Mirror the talks have broken down between May and Corbyn.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-brexit-talks-between-labour-14241915
That might just win the Eurovision.
Also being reported in the Torygraph - Starmer complains that the Government is not countenancing any changes to the deal.
It's probably both sticking to their guns, May's failed deal voted down three times vs Corbyn's proposal voted down three times. Don't quite see how they will agree.
Edit: that's exactly what is happening, Corbyn still insisting on his impossible proposal to be in the political declaration and May refusing everything
It’s understood that Labour has been pushing for changes to be made to the political declaration, with the government adopting the five key commitments Jeremy Corbyn set out in a letter to the prime minister in February – and for those to be enshrined in law. Those commitments were:
- A “permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union”, including a say in future trade deals.
- Close alignment with the single market, underpinned by “shared institutions”.
- “Dynamic alignment on rights and protections”, so that UK standards do not fall behind those of the EU.
- Clear commitments on future UK participation in EU agencies and funding programmes.
- Unambiguous agreements on future security arrangements, such as use of the European arrest warrant.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Last edited:
Thanks for your clarification.
In my opinion an EU Army is a terrible idea, particularly with Germany pushing for it.
Germany is renowned for under funding it's Military consistently failing to reach the agreed NATO target of 2% of GDP.
If they cannot fund their contribution to NATO how are they going to fund both the European Army and NATO.
Remember. One of the EU primary objectives is to maintain peace in Europe and the most effective way of doing this is through NATO.
A European Army would be bound to adversely affect NATO and that is why it is a stupid idea.
Right wing doesn't have a monopoly on crazy.
One of the very few MP'S who I have any time for.
We're about a week away from calamity.
It's bad enough.
No-one will want to be the first to concede, in all likelihood. Once there's a concession and a material change, things are likely to happen relatively quickly (one way or the other).
They've got till Tuesday night, I have no idea what they could possibly agree on.
Plus getting parliament to agree to it.
I did read earlier that the meetings with Lidington were just them explaining the detail of the WA to Labour so it comes as no surprise that they were never willing to compromise.
Seems like they just wanted to fill the gap before they bring something back
Seems like they just wanted to fill the gap before they bring something back
Potentially, but a) I’m not sure the public would buy that argument, outside of hard brexiteers it will be impossible to placate. And b) He doesn’t really have a choice - labour need to help find a conclusion to this deadlock.
lightbulbs 