I’m speaking relatively, but they’re also not starting from zero it’s worth adding. With the U.K. involved too, it’s a decent defense force to build upon.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
I’m speaking relatively, but they’re also not starting from zero it’s worth adding. With the U.K. involved too, it’s a decent defense force to build upon.
Will you leave the UK and move to an EU country where people are actually elected if some unelected person were to run the UK? Dominic says hi.
I wonder what happens to the Tory hopes of a US trade deal if Biden wins in November.
Let's be honest 2021 is gonna make us pine for the sunny uplands of 2020 isn't it. Brexit is going to be a shitshow visible from space.
Last edited:
If Trump wins , it will go something like .
Trump: Right sonny, no longer hiding behind your buddies in the EU. Now let's see - I hear that the UK currently sells more to the USA than the USA sells to the UK, now we can't have that can we. So Boris, I suggest that as the population is about 5 times bigger in the US than the UK , the amount of stuff the US sells to the UK will be 5 times what the UK sells to the US. So you can quit selling us your damned cars!! And buy our chicken, it's finger-dissolving good!
Just checked, not on the website at all.We probably have to put hunter on the books as a £50k a month consultant at network rail?
No, no, I'm too long in the tooth to move now, but I hope to see the 'sunny up lands' resulting from Brexit....actually I quite like some of the ideas Dominic comes up with, or at least he is credited with, oh dear what an admission ... I'll go and sit on the naughty step!
Need I say more, currently there is no chance of an EU army being formed for a trading block, (what are the going to do send gunboats up the river to force people to buy from them?) now if it was to became a Power Block, e.g. as the United States of Europe, it could join the super power group. France apparently would be quite willing to give up its seat on the UN Security Council to let the USE take its place.... as long as a Frenchman was the Commander-in-Chief.
They already do in the 'Five Eyes' Alliance
Last edited:
Who told you that?
Well to be honest not sure about the last bit about Frenchman being CC... but Guy Verhofstadt has made reference to this eventuality, if and when the USE was formed.
The Kent lorry park will be.
And at which point did you hear that France were willing to give their seat? France isn't even favorable to a federation. France aren't willing to give up a thing, you are mixing foreing politicians talking about France while Le Drian has made it clear that it was nonsensical.
It was sometime back, Guy Vershofstadt was postulating that if and when a EU army was formed one of the consequences would be that both France and the UK would have to be willing to give up their seats on the UN Security Council in order to facilitate an EU representative. Since the UK is no longer in the EU they won't be giving up their seat any time soon, so the pressure will fall on France to stand aside for the new USE.
No one gives a damn about Verhofstadt, he isn't french and has no power. You claimed that France were willing to give up their seat which isn't the case, unless if you are back into your fantasies.
I agree about Verhostadt, he's a 'little rascal' isn't he, became a must read, must see poster boy for leavers in the UK.
I said 'apparently' (referenced to Verhostadt's line), but you have put matters straight, if there is going to be a USE is does not matter, France is going to keep its place on the UN Security Council, come what may, and (do you concur) they can stuff the majority voting as well?
I have no idea about what would happen if a USE happened, it's not in the near future and I don't know what member states will think at that time and how the EU will be just before it happens. And no they can't stuff the majority voting, with unanimity you do nothing, a qualified majority which is the current way of taking decision within the Council of the EU is the best option.
So, you do not anticipate any problems with QMV over the EU's 'ever closer union' objective, with standard approval QMV being 55% States/65% Populace and reinforced approval being QMV being 72%States/72% Populace ?
Is that because the option will never be put to the vote?
If so better not tell Guy Verhofstadt!
Agree with the first part of this post but of course Australia and NZ will align to the US and are in fact already aligned to the US. They already are engaged in the 5 eyes network for instance, ANZUS, engaged with QUAD, engaged with NATO. The biggest source of their foreign arms imports are from the USA. The USA has a permanent military presence in Australia for training. They were involved with the occupation of Japan, Korean war, Vietnam war, 1st gulf war, Afghanistan war and 2nd gulf war. Their recent rhetoric has been directed aggressively towards China. The recent defence review involves buying large amounts of arms from the USA and mentions dealing with 'potential aggression in the Indo-pacific'. He for sure was not talking about Fiji. He also mentioned the need to build a reasonable deterrent, with other nations, Japan, India, Indonesia, in the region. No prizes again for seeing which country wasn't mentioned in that list.
If in the future relations between the USA and China continue to become ever more strained and countries are forced to choose sides (I don't see it happening as starkly as it did in the cold war), then Australia and NZ will for sure have a harder decision to make than the USA, Canada, UK or EU (all of which have varying degrees of trade with China). But I can't see the circumstance in which Australia or NZ ends up in the Chinese camp if it does end up coming down to that.
Very happy to see the EU have agreed the Covid economic rescue package by the way.
Given how badly the uk performed with covid I wonder how much eu support we would have been given if we were still a member
What are you talking about? QMV is about how decisions are taken at the council, governments seldomly use referendums when they deal with foreign policies issues, we would be voting every day if it was the case. Now when it comes to treaties which would be the context of your worries, you sign treaties or you don't, they have nothing to do with QMV.
In practice you will still get money at some point, you are now part of the EU neighborhood policy.
It's fine, we'll just be forced to go on strike after months of being ignored at negotiations even though we're already 12 months behind and get called cnuts by the same folk who were banging pots outside their front doors for weeks.
Yep everyone just keeps pushing and pushing making us do more with less and all we get is criticism. I bet people wouldn’t have a clue about the work local authorities have done during Covid.
Its ok, we don’t even get that. Only moans when people have to pay their Council tax.
No, is not the only way. And no, while UK would have veto, they could use it, so UK can decide. It doesn't matter that you repeat that the USodE will happen, is not true
I don't know how much help if the UK opted out on the EU vaccine scheme. I don't see the UK engaged with the EU on anything
I wonder if public opinion on Brexit in the UK might’ve shifted a year from now, when people experience its reality.
People still think Brits are going to be lining up to pick fruit for minimum wage once workers from Eastern Europe stop coming to Britain. A year from now I suspect that there will be a struggle to find people to do that job.
Then you’ve got the NHS which looks like it’ll be scraped to get a trade deal with the US. A hard border in Ireland seems like a certainty and that lorry park in Kent looks like fun.
I’m feeling relieved that I moved to Canada.
Anyone feeling optimistic about the immediate future in the UK?
People still think Brits are going to be lining up to pick fruit for minimum wage once workers from Eastern Europe stop coming to Britain. A year from now I suspect that there will be a struggle to find people to do that job.
Then you’ve got the NHS which looks like it’ll be scraped to get a trade deal with the US. A hard border in Ireland seems like a certainty and that lorry park in Kent looks like fun.
I’m feeling relieved that I moved to Canada.
Anyone feeling optimistic about the immediate future in the UK?
No, I am not.
I still think brexit is so entrenched in people that people will call it a success no matter what.
The NHS will be taken a part very slowly so people won’t even notice.
No. Before the Brexit debacle started we were 50/50 about returning to the UK to retire but that has reduced to zero now. Sadly my son will now never hold a British passport as the Irish one makes so much more sense.
Brexit will prove to be the worst decision made since ... erm?????
I was going to say the poll tax but this is much worse. Churchill returning to the gold standard in 1925 maybe?
Not exactly a government decision but the Scots attempts to set up its own colony in Central America 1698. Sadly the Darian Gap in Columbia where they choose, is essentially a tropical swamp, which doomed the project from day 1 and nearly bankrupted the Scottish ruling class and forced it to seek the Act of Union with England in 1707.
You only need to look at how the UK handled COVID, despite having ample time to prepare, the advantage of being an island.. still most deaths per capita?
If it was the UK that got hit first in Europe instead of Italy.. well...thank feck it wasn't.
You put an incredibly competent government in power and Brexit is still a crock of shite. Paint a turd as much as you wish, still a fecking turd.
Except, we not only have a bunch of fecking incompetent morons in power, they're also utter cnuts with little regard for the population and now have the perfect scape goat in Covid.
If it was the UK that got hit first in Europe instead of Italy.. well...thank feck it wasn't.
You put an incredibly competent government in power and Brexit is still a crock of shite. Paint a turd as much as you wish, still a fecking turd.
Except, we not only have a bunch of fecking incompetent morons in power, they're also utter cnuts with little regard for the population and now have the perfect scape goat in Covid.
At some point there's going to be an investigation and you'd expect it will lay out how many could have been saved and it'll be grim.
Question for the government then will be how welcoming the population are to the argument that we had to let them die to save X GDP. That's a decision they make every election but not so directly.
That's not the bollocks "lock down indefinitely" strawman either but simply timing of the lockdown and extent.
Any investigations and reports are useless if the tories are involved.
UK close to abandoning post-Brexit trade deal with EU due to deadlock on key issues, report claims
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...hing-rights-level-playing-field-a9631381.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...hing-rights-level-playing-field-a9631381.html
Which was the plan all along.
So, if the proposal from the Council was, via treaty, to form what amounts to a USE, i.e. following the ever closer union objective (from ToR) then the populace would not get a vote and any individual country could veto the proposal, and majority voting (qualified or unqualified) would not apply?
What would happen if say only one country didn't want a USE? Could they thwart the will of the 26 other countries, or would they be given their own. '...Exit' by the other 26?
I fully accept at the moment this would be an unlikely scenario, but my arguments are about future situations where a combination of actual climate change necessities (for survival) are required and any lingering issues from Covid or the next virus problem, require new norms to apply, surely across the continent of Europe the populace couldn't wait for each country to make up its own mind?
Majority voting has nothing to do with a potential federation, that type of things are out of the scope of the EU, the council, commission or any supra national organizations.
Why? Because it's a constitutional matter which is above international treaties(for example the EU), you would be changing the statutes of a country. The way a country modifies its constitution depends on the constitution of said country it has nothing to do with the EU, some questions are to be dealt with referendums while others are dealt by members of parliament/Senate/or both(In France we call that the Congress).
As for your second question it exposes a massive misunderstanding on what the EU and a country are, if 26 countries decided to form a federation and the 27th decided not to, you would have a EU with two countries, a federation with 26 states and the former 27th, unless if there is a decision to abrogate EU treaties.
And that type of things will never be done due to climate change or Covid-19, it would take an absolute eternity for every countries involved to agree on a constitution, even if the EU evolved into something that was very close to a federation. It's not going to be some sort of surprise, you will need at least one new treaty and since the current one isn't close to it, you would most likely need a lot of new structural treaties and since every treaties have opt outs, no one is going to be in the situation that you describe.