But what's the difference with NATO - or put it another way, what if NATO was only made up of individual EU states.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
But what's the difference with NATO - or put it another way, what if NATO was only made up of individual EU states.
You are dreaming.
If they want to strengthen NATO then don't invent a new Army, strengthen NATO.
Getting nervous are we.
I'm missing the relevance of your answer.
It doesn't matter if what you have said is factually correct (it fecking isn't) because the whole thing is a bullshit, straw man, non-event of an argument that has no real bearing on anything other than to give idiots another stupid soundbite to obfuscate and bluff their way around arguments they lack the ability to engage with properly.
The biggest threat to anything is this Roger Stoneism of modern politics. Scumbags have managed to hack the system by appealing to the very lowest common denominator of developed societies and giving them a dumb, rotten and very loud voice - then finger pointing and villainising anyone who points out the obvious stupidity of their shite.
It's worked so well that anyone with an IQ higher than they can count has been stunned into paralysis and clowns like Trump, Farage and the DUP have been given a chair at the table rather than the padded walls they deserve.
The greatest trick they ever pulled was convincing decent people that by mocking idiots and ignoring their racist, stupid, bigoted, sexist, xenophobic, outdated, misogynistic, nasty opinions they were somehow to blame for letting them in.
It's bollocks. It's taken us thousands of years to reach a level where decent, intelligent people understand right from wrong and in the space of a half decade, we've regressed by getting dragged into discourse with the lowest of the low.
Trump and Brexit both exist because small people hate stuff and their hate has been legitimised by scumbags who will profit from manipulating stupidity.
But it isn't.
My view and I have worked for a company involved in major defence programmes for many years is that NATO has and should continue to be the primary defence organisation for the west.
Any new organisations will only fragment and weaken its relevance.
Getting? Where the feck have you been the last 2 years or so?
Looks like Arlene Foster has realised the backstop isn't going anywhere and now looking for a deal.
How much is it going to cost?
How much is it going to cost?
Is anyone really surprised the ERG are now asking for the backstop to be removed after initially asking for a time limit?
They do not want a deal.
They do not want a deal.
I was referring to the UK making a success of being outside the EU which could well happen.
Strengthening NATO wouldn't be the main objective of it, it would be a automatic consequence.
I may be dreaming but at least i'm not posting delirious nonsense.
Don't know about happy but I just find it enjoyable that there's a group of people who are in seemingly still shocked to find out that Corbyn is in fact a socialist.
Mate, the fact you still believe there is an upside to Brexit confuses the hell out of me if I'm being honest, especially when you keep reminding us that you're a remainer who voted remain. What does this success look like and what needs to happen for this occur?
If you've already answered that question just link your post in response...
Is there? Speaking for myself I was hoping (like an idiot) that he'd actually, you know, do something, wrt avoiding this impending no deal brexit.
I think a lot of people are getting to that stage mate. It's became maddening to hear the same shite over and over again. They all have similar opinions about the Irish border problem and it's always either A) There is no Irish border problem, we just won't have a border. B) I've just now thought up a brilliant solution that all the experts couldn't think of over the last 3 years or C) Moan about the backstop and say it's unnecessary/pointless but then just ignore any questions asking what the alternative could be. Or usually various combinations of all three.
Like most i've long since came to the conclusion that the majority of them don't give a single feck about what happens in Ireland.
Apart from Canada the US and Turkey it practically is made up of EU countries or at least countries that would identify as being on the continent of Europe.
Why the need for an EU force? Trump? He won't be there forever. Deal with the US - not Trump.
I never intended to engage you in conversation because you have nothing to offer. I was simply pointing that out.
And never have. Then they have the temerity to question why we don't trust their word without a backstop.
Apparently 2000 of them have signed a petition calling for Ireland to be given a referendum on leaving the EU to join the UK.
The delusion is only eclipsed by the arrogance.
You dont want max fac. Boris Johnson and JRM shut up about it immediately once it was costed. 2 reports were done on it and they both said it'd cost about double your annual eu contributions every year. It was also rejected because it would involve the UK collecting tariffs on the EU's behalf - which you aren't trusted to do for obvious reasons.
As for bold - I dont see how giving Northern Ireland what they voted for, something theres broad support from both sides of the community for is an issue of sovereignty. Thats a blatantly absurd point.
Fecking hell, i hadn't even heard about that shit. What a time to be alive.
Again, I repeat: Germany fulfils all its obligations. It contributes to NATO budget as much as it is obliged to.
The 2% guideline is precisely that: a guideline. And they still have five years to conform to that guideline.
They can’t take yes for an answer. After what happened to Major and Cameron, it should be clear that you can never win enough concessions to persuade them because, for the hardcore Brexiteers, “Europe” is some psychological repositary of hate and fears rather than the legal and diplomatic construct that is the EU. But May made her bed back in 2016 so she deserves everything she gets.
For what it is worth, I care about both parts of Ireland and have some sympathy with ROI due to its specific issued created by geography
Out of interest and regarding point C, do you recognise the issues and have a potential solution caused by the backstop proposed (NI specific), namely;
1) The potential indefinite nature of a backstop, as in the UK having no control on when it can leave it.
2) The proposal where NI would remain under EU trade regukations/ customs, essentially delegating it from the rest of the UK (essentially a surrender of sovereignty for part of the UK)
These are genuine questions, as it is two of the key reason (In my view) why that solution hasn't garnered support in the UK and needs to be revisited
This just isn't true, at all
Interesting 1st para. I see there are proposals for an existing tech solution
On the 2nd para, not sure what you mean about 'voted for'. Was there a specific vote for NI to have different customs/ trade arrangements to the rest of the UK
In what way?
There is no existing tech. If there was then the backstop would never come into use and there wouldn't be objections to it. Northern Irelands position (which isn't the same as the DUP's position) is pretty well established.
Its a ridiculous point. Unless were talking about Englands sovereign right to dictate policy to Northern Ireland against their wishes
There is a lot of ignorance about this issue and my fear is that it will deteriorate until sides start to literally back into their respective corners of the boxing ring and the paramilitaries take over. It must not be allowed come to this. The progress made in the last 20 odd years has been nothing short of a revelation. The relations between the ROI and the UK have improved and there is real hope of reconciliation after some of the dreadful wrongdoings of the past.
It makes me feel sad that we have neighbours across the Irish sea that identify with our culture more than any other country in Europe. Speak the same language, have a massive diaspora in the UK and who have contributed as much as anyone to the prosperity. We come together in sport i.e. the Lions. Most people in England would root for the ROI in a football world cup, like in 1994 when England failed to qualify. I play a lot of folk music and I have Irish friends with whom I swap tunes and whatnot. The songs and traditions span all of these islands. We should be closer - not further apart.
The specific issues weren't caused by Geography. They we're caused by Britain.
- Don't invade other countries.
- Don't sign up to Unions you don't like being a member of.
- Don't sign up to peace agreements you don't intend on honouring.
- Don't negotiate withdrawal agreements you don't intend on honouring.
- Don't be a dick.
Agreed that most of NATO is Europe anyway.
I wasn't really arguing for or against the concept but why if NATO were only EU states would it be seen as federal when the combination of the current members of NATO are not seen as a federal state.
You are right that every country has their own specificities, though I believe that having more referendums in any country could be possible and should be done regardless on their size, but population should be educated and the debates on the referendums should be informative and as objective as possible.
Brexit referendum had nothing of that and due to the lack of referendum culture in UK (and most of the countries in the world) even some people voted for things non related to the referendum goal, like kicking Cameron out as he linked his departure if UK would vote for leaving the EU
Would it though? Also at what cost?
Leaving aside Trumps machinations over who pays for what, Europe would not be able to fight a 'star wars' type conflict on its own. Regan's decision to up the anti in space, forced the Russians to spend big in retaliation, but it was unsustainable for their economy and this in part at least led to the collapse of the old USSR. Even if it paid fully for its own conventional defence, Europe could not sustain the new arms race that would result and it would still require the US nuclear umbrella. Yes, it may have its own foreign policy, but it would be remarkably similar to the USA as far as Russia and China were concerned. As you correctly point out the collective European empire building days, undertaken at various times by France, Belgium, Holland, (as well as Britain) etc. are over, Europe would only ever go to war in future its own defence. However burden of spending, maintaining a standing EU army to repulse the Russians and at the same time a 'star wars' capability to fend off China, would be enormous and would collapse the euro-zone, possibly overnight.
Yeah this is part of what angers me the most.
My parents moved to England when I was 2 years old and I spent the formative decade of my life living there. I travel to Wales, Scotland and England for rugby or football matches several times a year and some of my greatest friends are British.
I was born a Catholic but am as far from practicising as it's possible to be - I despise what the IRA became as much as I despise the DUP and all the other criminal thugs who used religion and history to bully, intimidate and main or kill innocents. I'm not even particularly patriotic outside of sporting occasions and regularly criticise Irish politics or societal peculiarities. I left Ireland the day I finished college to travel and work around the world for almost a decade before returning home to set up a business here.
But sometimes I feel like I'm coming across like a hardcore republican, redneck nutjob just for pointing out basic, obvious inequalities and historical facts.
A few pages back someone called the GFA one of the greatest pieces of foreign policy ever negotiated and the scumbag he was being drawn into a bullshit argument responded with a green laughing emoji.
That is the level of care and discourse we're witnessing and reading about every day and it's being allowed because good people are afraid to stand up and call these people out for what they are.
They're either idiots or they're scum.
Lads, is this an alternative account of @Stanley Road
I actually thought it might have been I Believe originally, what happened to him?
That's a very bigotted set of views and explains a lot about how you post.
Perhaps I haven't been clear. So:
We start with a European Army.
How do we move the troops and equipment?
We will need Air Transport.
How do we protect the Air Transport?
We will need an Air Force.
If we have a European Army and Air Force do we need a Navy?
If we have an Army and Air Force why should we pay all this money for NATO?
Remember. France has its own Nuclear capability.
Germany has a NATO commitment to provide a nuclear capability. This it currently does with its Tornado jets operating with USA supplied weapons.
All the time, Putin looks on hardly believing his luck.
The USA gets fed up with picking up the major share of NATO funding and says we are perfectly capable of looking after ourselves.
End of NATO.
All the time Putin looks on making his plans to then destabilise Europe.
Fiction? Just look at history....
.
He's a blast from the past. Paul, Brexit will be great, we'll make our own laws, Paul...Yeah he got banned. I think he went full racist.I'm going to need you to explain how this is bigotted for me.
So why would it possibly consider a European Army then.