My only problem is that, as a Scot, if NI somehow remains in the customs union or has some special relationship with the EU, I want it too.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
My only problem is that, as a Scot, if NI somehow remains in the customs union or has some special relationship with the EU, I want it too.
Regarding the bolded part, the trouble is, they don’t. They literally invaded and occupied neighbouring countries in the past few years. Who would have thought Europe’s borders would be changing again by force, but here we are.
NATO collapsing or the US pulling out would terrify me even more.
It doesn’t have to be an overnight transition. But it’s the direction we should be going and it’s long overdue. America is not a reliable guardian for our interests, and no country should be expected to fulfil that role. Europe should look after Europe.
Isn't the EU army thing just bluster that neither France nor Germany actually want?
15 years ago the UK were basically the only big army from western Europe member of NATO, Germany were bridled, Italy are alright and the rest aren't much. So I don't really see where this new idea that NATO would collapse if basically France and a bunch of military minnows weren't around, the biggest member is a newbie and you were perfectly fine without it.
France have the 6th highest military spending in the world, and higher than the UK.
Why I didn't waste my breath countering his silliness.
I know but my point is that France only rejoined NATO in 2009, it spent 40 years out of it.
I refer the right honorable gentleman to my previous answer.
Albeit with a secret agreement to rejoin NATO operational command structures in a time of crisis...
You beat me to it so well said.
People who underestimate the requirements for a strong and robust defence capability are the real danger to continued peace.
Just look east to what is happening.
After WW2, like most of Western Europe the UK recovered with help.
They seemed to realise the world was changing, founder member of EFTA in 1960. Throughout the 60s they knew they needed to and desperately tried to join the EC, which they did eventually when they were in so much trouble in the 60s/70s but recovered reasonably quickly.
Car industry came back because they were a key player in a key market.
The Uk recovered quicker than the EU from the financial crisis and were starting to come out of austerity and flourishing and then boom...
The GFA is under threat, the car industry will gradually disappear without access to the EU, no way can the UK have better deals than they can as part of the EU.
I do not see any positives and no-one has yet shown what the positives could be, beyond wishful thinking.
I find it terribly sad and equally annoying when they try to blame everyone except themselves.
For NATO only in case of nuclear war. Otherwise France wasn't in the committees.
Have you ever wondered why the US/Soviet Union would rather lose the Vietnam/Afghanistan war then use nukes? The answer is simple. 100 Hiroshima like bombs (small bombs compared to today's Nuke standards) are enough to throw the world in a nuclear winter that would last for decades, wiping 2 billion people off the map through famines etc. If the nuclear superpowers detonated just 5% of all nukes then the world would be made inhabitable. Therefore if Russia used nukes to invade Europe then rest assured that everyone from the US to India right to China, Israel, Pakistan and even North Korea would gang up against them. Not to forget that considering the close proximity between Europe and Russia, then the offending party would be heavily affected as well, which means that the idiot who orders such madness won't last very much. Nukes are a fabulous defensive deterrent for a desperate country whose being invaded and therefore has nothing to lose. However its an extremely lousy offensive deterrent. So that's option is out of the question.
With that out of the way, we need to focus on conventional warfare. In terms of military spending Europe outspends Russia significantly. Unfortunately while Russia has one military strategy and one aim, Europe has 27 different military strategies and aims which leads to alot of waste and redundancies. A blitz like attack would send Europe in chaos as all those military resources as 27 countries would need to vote in parliament, have their armies organized and deployed. Things would change however if there's 1 HQ and one aim ie that of defending Europe from foreign invasion.
PS China won't back Russia in an invasion of Europe.
A- A new Soviet Union would make the country a super power again. Its not within China's interest to return to its junior partner role especially since Russia has a bone on contention with China as well
B- China had invested heavily in Europe. A potential WW3 would ruin everything
If NATO ends then there's every chance that China would work hard to take the US's place
A- It would steal the US from its ally
B- It would keep Russia in its box
I nearly forgot, I have some actual Brexit gossip this week in the same vein as the Nissan news.
One of my clients I teach is the head of digital marketing for a big multinational marketing agency, and one of their huge European multinational clients has just pulled a big campaign based on Brexit uncertainty. If they're doing it, I can only imagine that loads more companies are thinking in the same way. More actual, tangible bad news for the UK directly from Brexit and it's not even happened yet.
One of my clients I teach is the head of digital marketing for a big multinational marketing agency, and one of their huge European multinational clients has just pulled a big campaign based on Brexit uncertainty. If they're doing it, I can only imagine that loads more companies are thinking in the same way. More actual, tangible bad news for the UK directly from Brexit and it's not even happened yet.
Couple of points.
We did not join the EC. We joined the Common Market.
Who are 'they' who blame everyone.
It is perfectly clear to me that judging by the comments here, we are blaming our politicians for the undoubted mess.
They changed it from EC to EEC to make it more sellable but when I voted in 75 it wasn't so that British Leyland could sell their cars more easily to France.
I remember the same arguments back then.
I meant the Brexiters are blaming the EU for not solving the problems they caused.
We insist on shooting ourselves in the head and it is Europe's fault that they don't stop the bullet from doing any harm.
We all know that without the EU shooting yourself in the head is by far the best plan.
They really don't want us to shoot ourselves in the head at all and are trying their best to mitigate the damage if we insist. Fecking EU. It is all their fault.
I’m bored of this, I’m going for a Twix.
Grayling the is the worst cabinet minister in my lifetime. You can't make him up.
Grayling has done well to last this long as Transport Secretary
I had one earlier and I was enjoying it fully until I realised we import it from Holland. My eyes watered reading that info on the packet
feck jobs what are we going to do about Twix!!!
I'm off to buy some gold I think, may aswell make some money out of the misery
I had one earlier and I was enjoying it fully until I realised we import it from Holland. My eyes watered reading that info on the packet
feck jobs what are we going to do about Twix!!!
It's a twix in name, but not really the same quality it was 15 odd years back. A lot of the old British chocolate products have dropped in quality (choc content and product size), while production has shifted to the continent.
I imagine that we will see a lot of these products replaced in our shopping baskets in the upcoming years*. Chocolate production is having a revival in the UK**, with a focus on craft and quality. Any daft stuff of whacking up tarrifs would likely accelerate it further
* bit like how the bog standard largers and bitters have lost market share for Real Ale and Craft Beer
** didn't actually realise that twix was a UK product
Last edited:
Sure what would “the continent” know about making good quality food anyway?!?
Europe is famously shit at making chocolate in particular
Who Is saying the 'continent' don't know how to make quality food.
From my recollection, the chocolate content of the bigger brands has been steadily dropping over recent years. Don't think that necessarily relates to where it was made, just a shift in how some of the big businesses now approach this market
Yes let's mock the views of working class people from 40 years ago. Easy.
There'd be a French, German, Spanish equivalent to be posted but that wouldn't suit your narrative.
There'd be a French, German, Spanish equivalent to be posted but that wouldn't suit your narrative.
My mistake. You must be honouring them.
Last edited:
Well, exactly.
But it’s interesting that your first instinct was to blame lowering manufacturing standards on production shifting to mainland Europe. That’s the sort of unsubstantiated eurosceptism Boris Johnson has made a career out of.
I didn't. Although looking back at that sentence structure (edited now to be clearer), I can see how it could have been interpreted that way
Ok, fair enough. Apologies if I misinterpreted what you’re saying. Although there’s also an irony in you mentioning chocolate as a foodstuff which can shift to more localised production after Brexit, considering its one of not many types of food that’s impossible to manufacture without importing ingredients from overseas. Often via shipping lines that use mainland European ports.
Well that was basically what the withdrawal agreement and backstop were designed to enable, but you can't put a time limit on it. It's needed until it isn't, it's as simple as that. No one can guarantee a solution will be found within a certain timeframe.
Well i'm not 100% certain it would be the EU's decision as i've said i think the UK would be in control as soon as they found a solution. And i don't necessarily agree with the idea that the UK would be 'trapped'. But lets say that was the case, the UK (specifically Northern Ireland) wouldn't be trapped by the backstop it would be trapped by the Good Friday Agreement. And this is the big sticking point thats thrown a spanner into the gears of Brexit.
The British government agreed to uphold the GFA no one forced them to. They have a responsibility to it and the people of Northern Ireland. Lets also remember that the EU proposed that only NI stay within the CU/SM and the majority of people here in NI would have been more than happy with that arrangement. That would have enabled Britain to leave the EU/CU/SM unhindered.
You say you prefer a fixed term period to sort it out. But what happens if at the end of this fixed period there is still no solution found to the border issue? Does the British government just go ''Oh well we gave it a jolly good try chaps.'' and then rip up the GFA and break international law?
No worries it was basically asking how you thought the UK could leave the EU and still preserve the GFA. But you basically answered it with this post.
No worries, no need to apologise.
Just to clarify, the local production is already happening, but could be sped up under certain Brexit conditions.
Interesting topic you raise on raw inputs (components), although chocolate is a relatively simple product, it is still reliant on a globalised supply chain. The world economy is increasingly interdependent and I'd find it an interesting read to see how many products can be feasibly sourced and produce in a single country (or regional collections of countries)
As a slight aside on interdependence, it gets scary when i realised how key raw materials in concentrated in such limited geographical locations. This ranges from a 'traditional' essential of phosphate (fertiliser) being heavily concentrated in Morocco, through to a range of rare earth elements (high end tech products) located in the relatively unstable parts of Africa. A long term disruption to supply and the world would be screwed
The reporting hasn't been particularly great on the implications of the deal, but the following article perhaps better articulates some of my 'trapped' concerns around the backstop
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...irish-border-guarantee-may-deal-a8678306.html
Re the time limit, it was mainly to avoid a cliff edge this year that could have significant consequences. You are right that we could be in the same position 2/3 years down the line and a tough decision would still need to be made. But my hope is that it buys time for a sensible solution to gain consensus by all involved. Personally, I think it would be a different negotiating scenario, with greater engagement in the UK, while there is greater assertiveness but less adversarial relations with the EU in negotiating - tjrtevis growing Brexit fatigue and basic level, most people want it sorted amicably