Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[Siorac]

I suspect Trump would be delighted if the EU paid the total cost for its own defence, but not sure many of the 27 states populations (UK excluded) would thinks so when they saw the bill.

There has always been a trade off with the USA, twice in the last century the US had to intervene to help save Europe (from its self). To try to ensure it doesn't have to do so again, especially with a President whose mantra is "America first", the US uses Europe as a bulwark against Russia and accepts there is a cost for doing this. However if the EU steps up and offers to pay for its own entire defence... well that would be right up Trump's ally!

The EU countries pay the costs of their own defence. It is sheer American propaganda that they don't. They just don't spend as much as the United States. But France, Germany and the UK are all in the top 10 worldwide in terms of military expenditure.

Also, all NATO members contribute a certain amount directly to the NATO budget. Germany's share, for example, is roughly 15% of the overall direct funding (the US' is 22%). Everyone fulfils these obligations.

Not all NATO countries spend at least 2% of their GDP on the military. That is true. However, they are not required to do so: it's a guideline that countries should aim to increase defence expenditure in real terms as GDP grows; and aim to move towards the 2% guideline by 2024.

 

[Bola]

I'm glad someone is happy with him...

I think they are frustrated by you making them go over the same arguements, they should just cut and paste what they said to the last poster pushing your point of view. I'm not even trying to take the piss here (well not much), its a bit like groundhog day. What do you think of what they've been saying to you? (the content not the insults)

Some good points on the posts that are largely free of bile. Gave me a few areas to look more closely into, or to reconsider my overall viewpoints. For example, my recollection of the Cameron negotiations were skewed and on reading some articles pre the referendum, i've realised that I was harsher on the EU than I should have been

Amazing what civil debate can do. Shame that some have to resort to name calling and seemingly, are unwilling to challenge their own views

 

[Siorac]

Interesting how the remainer/ anti Brexit posters quickly descend into insults on this thread. Speaks volumes

It indicates how frustrating it is when Leavers fail to offer any sort of basis for seemingly unfounded opinions, such as calling the EU aloof and arrogant and unwilling to negotiate fairly.

 

[NinjaFletch]

I'm not going to educate you on the basic political principles of how a political state comes about.

You might need to do some wider reading

Interesting how the remainer/ anti Brexit posters quickly descend into insults on this thread. Speaks volumes

Interesting how Brexiteers always appear in this thread, post a condescending remark or two, and then cry that people aren't playing nice.

 

[afrocentricity]

Some good points on the posts that are largely free of bile. Gave me a few areas to look more closely into, or to reconsider my overall viewpoints. For example, my recollection of the Cameron negotiations were skewed and on reading some articles pre the referendum, i've realised that I was harsher on the EU than I should have been Amazing what civil debate can do. Shame that some have to resort to name calling and seemingly, are unwilling to challenge their own views

Like I said, they've done this dance several times (I've seen it) so they are probably a bit short on patience. It's good that you're open to what they are saying though which is more than I can say for some of the previous posters I was referring to.

There's a lot of misinformation out here so we need to help eachother to get through it. Not as easy as it sounds though...

 

[Bola]

It indicates how frustrating it is when Leavers fail to offer any sort of basis for seemingly unfounded opinions, such as calling the EU aloof and arrogant and unwilling to negotiate fairly.

Or perhaps those with an unheathly and entrenched 'the EU can do no wrong' view

 

[Siorac]

Or perhaps those with an unheathly and entrenched 'the EU can do no wrong' view

Literally nobody thinks that.

 

[Bola]

Interesting how Brexiteers always appear in this thread, post a condescending remark or two, and then cry that people aren't playing nice.

You might want to go back and look at the tone of the posts that preferred me posting that.

I'm not perfect and not always going to 'turn the other' cheek if provoked

 

[Massive Spanner]

Amazing what civil debate can do. Shame that some have to resort to name calling and seemingly, are unwilling to challenge their own views

I didn't call you names, I simply asked you questions multiple times that you refused to answer. There was no malice in my posts., and your response was:

I'm not going to educate you on the basic political principles of how a political state comes about.

You might need to do some wider reading

That was a pretty ignorant and derogatory response to a perfectly valid question on my behalf, so don't try claim that you're the one being victimized here.

 

[diarm]

Interesting how the remainer/ anti Brexit posters quickly descend into insults on this thread. Speaks volumes

The sane spent years pandering to the lunatic asylum, being careful not to be seen as mean or insulting.

It hasn't worked because you've used their patience and attempts at understanding to legitimise running around with your fingers in your ears, licking windows and shouting at trees.

The time for civitliy has passed. If you had anything intelligent or constructive to say you'd have said it by now and by pretending you have anything left worth engaging with, everyone else is just sleepwalking their way into disaster.

 

[devilish]

I suspect Trump would be delighted if the EU paid the total cost for its own defence, but not sure many of the 27 states populations (UK excluded) would thinks so when they saw the bill.

There has always been a trade off with the USA, twice in the last century the US had to intervene to help save Europe (from its self). To try to ensure it doesn't have to do so again, especially with a President whose mantra is "America first", the US uses Europe as a bulwark against Russia and accepts there is a cost for doing this. However if the EU steps up and offers to pay for its own entire defence... well that would be right up Trump's ally!

https://www.euronews.com/2018/05/02/which-country-spent-the-most-on-its-military-in-2017-

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/here-s-why-the-united-states-needs-nato





Europe invested €282 billion in military in 2017. That's less then the US but more then China ( $228 billion (€188 billion)) and Russia ($66.3 billion). That might be considered peanuts for a country who seems to be in constant war but its a hell of a sum for a continent whose army would be utilised for defensive purposes only.

So what happens if the EU decides to organise themselves and kick NATO out? Well the US would lose valuable military bases which would make missions spiral out of control. But that's not all. The US would also lose powerful allies as well as Europe would finally be in a position to take foreign policy seriously. For example what happens if Europe decides to mend bridges with Russia? They are our neighbours after all which puts them in a good position to understand the geographic challenges we face. They are also our main suppliers of gas + lets face it their country served as the main graveyard for both Napoleon's and Hitler's armies. Also what would happen if next time the US decide to bomb the shite of a country which surprisingly always seem to be a neighbour of ours rather then theirs and Russia, China and the EU says no? Would there be sanctions? Not to forget that there's that little thorny issue regarding world trade and the dollar. God forbid if lets say the big 3 out of 4 decide to ditch the dollar for foreign trade. That would destroy the US economy.

So you see, the US needs NATO far more then Europe does. No wonder why orange hasn't pulled the plug on NATO as he promised he'll do.

However that's not really the issue here. In reality NATO isn't fit for purpose. Sure its got the firepower to bomb the shit out of Russia however most of its force is deployed elsewhere. In an event of an attack it would take NATO ages to organise itself. Russia on the other hand, being one entity, had been far more efficient in spending wisely its resources. I am no genius about this but from what I heard from military veterans, its military had been built around quick deployment followed by lightening strikes. The fear is that Russia would gulp huge pieces of Eastern Europe then threaten with nukes if it ever gets attacked. In that scenario May/Trump would have to choose whether they would sacrifice lets say Talinn or risk enjoying a nuclear winter in London or New York.We all know what they would choose.

The EU army would give Europe the independence it needs to shape its own foreign policy. From a military point of view + it would also reduce redundancies between respective militaries and it will help the continent build an army suited for the threats Europe is facing.

Please click on those links as you'll get pretty much most of the information from other sources

 

[Bola]

I didn't call you names, I simply asked you questions multiple times that you refused to answer. There was no malice in my posts., and your response was:


That was a pretty ignorant and derogatory response to a perfectly valid question on my behalf, so don't try claim that you're the one being victimized here.

I wasn't trying to be derogatory, but I was getting short at the tone of some of the responses and made a curt response. Looking back, it seems I mixed up your post with other. My apologies

 

[Bola]

The sane spent years pandering to the lunatic asylum, being careful not to be seen as mean or insulting.

It hasn't worked because you've used their patience and attempts at understanding to legitimise running around with your fingers in your ears, licking windows and shouting at trees.

The time for civitliy has passed. If you had anything intelligent or constructive to say you'd have said it by now and by pretending you have anything left worth engaging with, everyone else is just sleepwalking their way into disaster.

Thanks for proving my point

 

[diarm]

Thanks for proving my point

No problem.

On the last page you wrote that Britain abdicating their responsibilities under the Good Friday Agreement by enforcing a border between Ireland and Northern Ireland and jeopardising peace on our Island, is a price worth paying to reclaim some sense of sovereignty that they'd never actually lost in the first place.

You're either a stupid person or a bad person and I couldn't care less if you find my words unkind.

 

[Abizzz]

Thanks for proving my point

What he says is perfectly valid. You have not raised any point that hadn't been addressed by the 100th page of this thread. While I respect anyone by default, there are ways to lose my respect, and I and many others simply can't be arsed anymore, our patience has limits. Brexiteers are recklessly damaging their country and continent, they are doing so using lies, they are doing so out of malice or ignorance, either way, I'm done respecting that.

 

[Bola]

No problem.

On the last page you wrote that Britain abdicating their responsibilities under the Good Friday Agreement by enforcing a border between Ireland and Northern Ireland and jeopardising peace on our Island, is a price worth paying to reclaim some sense of sovereignty that they'd never actually lost in the first place.

You're either a stupid person or a bad person and I couldn't care less if you find my words unkind.

Great. I'll leave you to your life and warped views then

 

[Bola]

What he says is perfectly valid. You have not raised any point that hadn't been addressed by the 100th page of this thread. While I respect anyone by default, there are ways to lose my respect, and I and many others simply can't be arsed anymore, our patience has limits. Brexiteers are recklessly damaging their country and continent, they are doing so using lies, they are doing so out of malice or ignorance, either way, I'm done respecting that.

Good for you.

 

[diarm]

Great. I'll leave you to your life and warped views then

I wish ye would to be honest.

If Englanders had shared that notion throughout history we wouldn't still be getting dragged down into the shit with you now.

 

[Abizzz]

Good for you.

I know I shouldn't bother explaining to people who aren't taken serious why they aren't being taken serious... but sometimes I can't help myself.

 

[Smores]

May just flat out said she wasn't looking for the removal of the backstop but changes to it. Not sure if that was purposeful or she messed up.
That's quite a retreat and it isn't what the Brady amendment ot ERG support was based on.

 

[JPRouve]

@Bola The issue is that you came into the thread with provocative posts and smugness on subjects that we have discussed about in relative depth. The smugness won't be well received.

 

[diarm]

I know I shouldn't bother explaining to people who aren't taken serious why they aren't being taken serious... but sometimes I can't help myself.

For me it's just pure anger at this stage. The sense of entitlement that enables them to totally disregard the security and peace of a region their national is responsible for destabalising, because "they deserve a better deal" is one thing.

But when they don't even know or understand what deal that is, or how it it will work or what it will mean in the long term is just stunningly frustrating.

If they were evil, calculating geniuses, hell bent on screwing over whoever they could to achieve their brilliant scheme I would have more respect for them. I'd be pissed off but there'd be grudging respect alongside my hatred.

But seeing the peace process go up in smoke because we have to be nice to blithering, barely literate idiots who don't understand even the simplest elements of their own arguments is very, very difficult to stomach.

 

[Buster15]

I'm not saying whether it would happen or not but what would be your objection?

Good question.
My primary objections would be:
1. Whatever we think of NATO, it has been reasonably successful in maintaining peace; at least between major nations.
I do acknowledge that President Trump is not an advocate but he has and continues to challenge nations that do not meet their obligations. Germany for example. Why do we need to reinvent the wheel.
2. The biggest threat to NATO is not the Russia or Putin. It is the increasing weakness of NATO due to many things but funding is a significant problem.

Any potential organisation that would ultimately compete with NATO for resources would by definition weaken it.

My reading of President Macron's motivation for a European Army is to ensure that Europe (the EU) could defend itself against either the USA or Russia or China.

That being the case, it highlights the view that Europe needs act like a Federal State and IMHO that is totally contrary to the right of individual states self determination.
Apology if that is long winded.

 

[Raulduke]

Was May hoping the ERG wouldn't be listneing?

 

[diarm]

Good question.
My primary objections would be:
1. Whatever we think of NATO, it has been reasonably successful in maintaining peace; at least between major nations.
I do acknowledge that President Trump is not an advocate but he has and continues to challenge nations that do not meet their obligations. Germany for example. Why do we need to reinvent the wheel.
2. The biggest threat to NATO is not the Russia or Putin. It is the increasing weakness of NATO due to many things but funding is a significant problem.

Any potential organisation that would ultimately compete with NATO for resources would by definition weaken it.

My reading of President Macron's motivation for a European Army is to ensure that Europe (the EU) could defend itself against either the USA or Russia or China.

That being the case, it highlights the view that Europe needs act like a Federal State and IMHO that is totally contrary to the right of individual states self determination.
Apology if that is long winded.

I mean look at the absolute state of this.

There are literally days left until Britain stumbles drunk out of the EU and this is the level of discourse we're dealing with.

 

[Bola]

@Bola The issue is that you came into the thread with provocative posts and smugness on subjects that we have discussed about in relative depth. The smugness won't be well received.

But smugness and vitirolic posts about provocative anti-brexit views are ok?

 

[diarm]

But smugness and vitirolic posts about provocative anti-brexit views are ok?

How can we be anti-brexit if you still haven't told us what brexit is?

We're anti-idiot, not anti-brexit.

 

[Buster15]

I mean look at the absolute state of this.

There are literally days left until Britain stumbles drunk out of the EU and this is the level of discourse we're dealing with.

All of what I have said is factually correct.
I am sorry if you don't like it...

 

[Bola]

How can we be anti-brexit if you still haven't told us what brexit is?

We're anti-idiot, not anti-brexit.

Oh dear. Another angry poster

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Good question.
My primary objections would be:
1. Whatever we think of NATO, it has been reasonably successful in maintaining peace; at least between major nations.
I do acknowledge that President Trump is not an advocate but he has and continues to challenge nations that do not meet their obligations. Germany for example. Why do we need to reinvent the wheel.
2. The biggest threat to NATO is not the Russia or Putin. It is the increasing weakness of NATO due to many things but funding is a significant problem.

Any potential organisation that would ultimately compete with NATO for resources would by definition weaken it.

My reading of President Macron's motivation for a European Army is to ensure that Europe (the EU) could defend itself against either the USA or Russia or China.

That being the case, it highlights the view that Europe needs act like a Federal State and IMHO that is totally contrary to the right of individual states self determination.
Apology if that is long winded.

Thanks for the reply.

There's one point that I'd highlight - the last one - why does that lead you to believe that the EU would be one federal state and contrary to individual self determination when NATO is an organisation of many different countries all of whom are individual.

 

[horsechoker]

Was May hoping the ERG wouldn't be listneing?

They probably don't listen to facts or they ignore them so maybe May was counting on that.

 

[JPRouve]

All of what I have said is factually correct.
I am sorry if you don't like it...

It isn't factually correct though. If European countries decide to act like a federal state then they exercised their self determination. There is this strange idea among a part of the population that choosing to be with others and exercising your sovereignty collectively goes against self determination, that's wrong.

 

[JPRouve]

But smugness and vitirolic posts about provocative anti-brexit views are ok?

None of it is acceptable which is why I didn't insult you or looked down on you. I tried to engage with you despite the fact that I didn't like the way you talked to others.

 

[afrocentricity]

I mean look at the absolute state of this.

There are literally days left until Britain stumbles drunk out of the EU and this is the level of discourse we're dealing with.

You are killing it! I know it's not really a laughing matter but feck me, talk about going for the jugular. Cutting posts...

Oh dear. Another angry poster

He's got a point. I gave you the benefit of the doubt but you're acting like a WUM right now. Expand on your points, engage in a conversation, or just bail... The one liners aren't proving him wrong are they?

 

[Abizzz]

For me it's just pure anger at this stage. The sense of entitlement that enables them to totally disregard the security and peace of a region their national is responsible for destabalising, because "they deserve a better deal" is one thing.

But when they don't even know or understand what deal that is, or how it it will work or what it will mean in the long term is just stunningly frustrating.

If they were evil, calculating geniuses, hell bent on screwing over whoever they could to achieve their brilliant scheme I would have more respect for them. I'd be pissed off but there'd be grudging respect alongside my hatred.

But seeing the peace process go up in smoke because we have to be nice to blithering, barely literate idiots who don't understand even the simplest elements of their own arguments is very, very difficult to stomach.

Oh, yeah, if I were Irish or British I'd be seething at this point too.

It's the millions and millions of Brits who have no part in this but are caught up in it who I feel for most. I have the luxury of not being that affected, but that doesn't make me immune to being irritated by their bullsheetery.

All of what I have said is factually correct.
I am sorry if you don't like it...

Good question.
My primary objections would be:
1. Whatever we think of NATO, it has been reasonably successful in maintaining peace; at least between major nations.
I do acknowledge that President Trump is not an advocate but he has and continues to challenge nations that do not meet their obligations. Germany for example. Why do we need to reinvent the wheel.
2. The biggest threat to NATO is not the Russia or Putin. It is the increasing weakness of NATO due to many things but funding is a significant problem.

Any potential organisation that would ultimately compete with NATO for resources would by definition weaken it.

My reading of President Macron's motivation for a European Army is to ensure that Europe (the EU) could defend itself against either the USA or Russia or China.

That being the case, it highlights the view that Europe needs act like a Federal State and IMHO that is totally contrary to the right of individual states self determination.
Apology if that is long winded.

1) Your objection isn't an objection.
2) Any potential EU army would automatically be made up of NATO members and thereby strengthen NATO forces.

Your reading is wrong. No one is crazy enough to even contemplate military conflict with the USA, there's no point in planing for something that would be doom. Lastly, if "Europe needs act like a Federal State and IMHO that is totally contrary to the right of individual states self determination" why aren't you against the same thing in the form of NATO, which you seem to like?

 

[Bola]

You are killing it! I know it's
If you look back, I have engaged most poste

You are killing it! I know it's not really a laughing matter but feck me, talk about going for the jugular. Cutting posts...

He's got a point. I gave you the benefit of the doubt but you're acting like a WUM right now. Expand on your points, engage in a conversation, or just bail... The one liners aren't proving him wrong are they?

If you look.back through this thread today, I have engaged most posters in a conversation. I would have with him, but I struggled to see a point to answer to, it was mostly bile and he's blown his chance for a sensible debate today

 

[Buster15]

I mean look at the absolute state of this.

There are literally days left until Britain stumbles drunk out of the EU and this is the level of discourse we're dealing with.

And by the way. I acknowledge that the process of leaving the EU has not been our finest hour.
But. I would certainly not bet against us making a success of it.

 

[afrocentricity]

And by the way. I acknowledge that the process of leaving the EU has not been our finest hour.
But. I would certainly not bet against us making a success of it.

Shame, you'd get good odds...

 

[Buster15]

Thanks for the reply.

There's one point that I'd highlight - the last one - why does that lead you to believe that the EU would be one federal state and contrary to individual self determination when NATO is an organisation of many different countries all of whom are individual.

Because it is the right of each state to determine it's own defence strategy and defence forces.

 

[Buster15]

It isn't factually correct though. If European countries decide to act like a federal state then they exercised their self determination. There is this strange idea among a part of the population that choosing to be with others and exercising your sovereignty collectively goes against self determination, that's wrong.

Aha. A European Federal State with a European Army. Now things become clear.