|
Post by claytonscrubs on Mar 24, 2019 14:03:49 GMT
Every single one on board needs their hard drives checked immediately ... Are these the 18-25’s who’s future I stole by voting leave? Must be one hell of a paper round round their way.... Embarrassing!
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Mar 24, 2019 14:03:58 GMT
Going back to the OP, my guess now is; No concensus until April 12 so ask and agree a lengthy extension with a view to a new Referendum. The Referendum quesition: a choice between a new deal organised by the interim leader of the Tories ( Norway minus =Remain) or Remain ie no BREXIT option. Or in the interim there could be a general election, with the new government ending up in the same place.......unless headway is made by Brexit parties and reselected Tory MPs. The irony being that in any EU elections we become more Eurosceptic as does the rest of Europe.....so a greater divide between our political masters and the people. This could go on for years. The problem with the cliff-edger or WTO Brexit or whatever you want to call it which I think you favour, even if you don't care about the economy and how pensions and benefits and the NHS will be funded, is two fold. It does nothing for the 48% of people who voted remain, who lets not delude ourselves, pay a fuck sight more tax in total than the leavers. Perhaps you don't care about the people who voted remain anyway, but even if you don't the second problem is a large number of your leavers never voted to leave with no deal with our major trading partner the EU. Just more baloney from you , The only reason we are. On the verge. Of leaving without a deal is the backstop, which is a creation of project fear and an obstructive EU commission who did whatever they could to make this process unworkable
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 24, 2019 14:07:13 GMT
STILL pushing this line! Amazing. Turkey has no chance of joining the EU, none. How many Eastern Europeans were expected to come to Britain? Which has what to do with Turkey joining the EU? Absolutely nothing. Turkey will not be joining the EU as long as France has a say (so never then). This was a bullshit line pushed during the referendum and is bullshit now.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 24, 2019 14:07:42 GMT
I understand your concerns. The economic answer to your question is that the UK is a major trading nation, 6th largest economy in the world. Our life blood is trade. Our proportion of trade with the rest of the world is greater than with the EU and growing faster. >90% of future world growth is outside of of the EU and we need to be free to trade with the rest of the world. I have a relative who has been a senior executive for an American company and spent years in Singapore managing their far east activities. He cannot understand why anyone should want to remain tied to the EU. We have ex Australian premier quoted on here saying what is there to be afraid of? The UK is a much bigger country economically than Australia, Canada, NZ, etc. and can function quite comfortably. We will still trade with the EU we just move to WTO terms, a lot of which is zero rated. Some things like German, BMWs, Porches, and Mercedes will cost more unfortunately. We are dependent on Germany for pharmaceuticals, but so are they on us. Then there is the little argument of the cost and the waste of money by the EU. We are propping up French agriculture. There is no going back now, the EU will terminate the rebate in due course and our cost of membership would be doubled in a few years. But why don't you put finance to one side and think about liberty. We want our sovereignty back. Do the young people who emigrate to Australia and NZ worry about leaving the EU? Most of them go to be better off. You will be better off as well. There is a great deal of concern about leaving without an agreement and no doubt there will some people who want to play silly beggars. But I believe we will be amazed at how fast governments sort issues out when their economy is at stake. Germany benefits from a £20 billion pa trade balance with the UK; do you think they will put that at risk? Put finance to one side .. You say Wow... How can a 33 year old plasterer living in rented accommodation of 900k per month with four kids and a maintenance order put "finance to one side" ? Apologies if my "put finance......" remark offended. I was trying to point out that there reasons other that finance for leaving the EU. I actually think there will be very little difference to the working class in leaving the EU unless you happen to be in a job that involves selling to the EU. The benefits gained in selling to the rest of the world will be greater. Selling to most of the EU countries will not change significantly, such as Ireland and countries like Germany have a lot to lose if barriers are created. Whether we are in or out of the EU it is going to have little difference on your income or £900 per month rent, but rent may reduce if a large number of EU citizens move back to their former home country, which I honestly doubt will happen.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Mar 24, 2019 14:08:25 GMT
Going back to the OP, my guess now is; No concensus until April 12 so ask and agree a lengthy extension with a view to a new Referendum. The Referendum quesition: a choice between a new deal organised by the interim leader of the Tories ( Norway minus =Remain) or Remain ie no BREXIT option. Or in the interim there could be a general election, with the new government ending up in the same place.......unless headway is made by Brexit parties and reselected Tory MPs. The irony being that in any EU elections we become more Eurosceptic as does the rest of Europe.....so a greater divide between our political masters and the people. This could go on for years. The problem with the cliff-edger or WTO Brexit or whatever you want to call it which I think you favour, even if you don't care about the economy and how pensions and benefits and the NHS will be funded, is two fold. It does nothing for the 48% of people who voted remain, who lets not delude ourselves, pay a fuck sight more tax in total than the leavers. Perhaps you don't care about the people who voted remain anyway, but even if you don't the second problem is a large number of your leavers never voted to leave with no deal with our major trading partner the EU. Gods I do care about the economy, but no one can predict in reality what is best/ where we will be in 10 years time ( see links below) The Referendum was about making a clear decision...and people voted out....so no I don't think that there should be any compromise whatsoever. What should have happened is that Parliament and Remainers should have accepted the result. ( I don't particularly like Piers Morgan but his sentiment below I agree with ) Don't let's kid ourselves, if Remain had won we simply would not have been contemplating second referendra and compromise. You seem to have dismissed completely and are unable to contemplate the Idea that a country can be free, sovereign and independent of the EU and successful.. might not be easy to get there but it might be best....and of course you disregard the sovereign and democratic argument......yes, very important to me and are the basis, I believe, of a good economy. The EU is not particularly working out very well for the young people of Greece and Spain briefingsforbrexit.com/a-wto-based-brexit-could-yield-the-uk-80-billion-per-year/
|
|
|
Post by dexta on Mar 24, 2019 14:14:55 GMT
look like a bunch of middle class do goders What's wrong with doing good? sorry shouldn't have said do goders.... should have said twats
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Mar 24, 2019 14:16:08 GMT
The problem with the cliff-edger or WTO Brexit or whatever you want to call it which I think you favour, even if you don't care about the economy and how pensions and benefits and the NHS will be funded, is two fold. It does nothing for the 48% of people who voted remain, who lets not delude ourselves, pay a fuck sight more tax in total than the leavers. Perhaps you don't care about the people who voted remain anyway, but even if you don't the second problem is a large number of your leavers never voted to leave with no deal with our major trading partner the EU. Just more baloney from you , The only reason we are. On the verge. Of leaving without a deal is the backstop, which is a creation of project fear and an obstructive EU commission who did whatever they could to make this process unworkable Fair enough, at least you took on the question !
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Mar 24, 2019 14:27:06 GMT
The problem with the cliff-edger or WTO Brexit or whatever you want to call it which I think you favour, even if you don't care about the economy and how pensions and benefits and the NHS will be funded, is two fold. It does nothing for the 48% of people who voted remain, who lets not delude ourselves, pay a fuck sight more tax in total than the leavers. Perhaps you don't care about the people who voted remain anyway, but even if you don't the second problem is a large number of your leavers never voted to leave with no deal with our major trading partner the EU. Gods I do care about the economy, but no one csn predict in reality what is best/ where we will be in 10 years time ( see links below) The Referendum was about making a clear decision...and people voted out....so no I don't think that there should be any compromise whatsoever. What should have happened is that Parliament and Remainers should have accepted the result. ( I don't particularly like Piers Morgan but his sentiment below I agree with m Don't let's kid ourselves, if Remain had won we simply would not have been contemplating second referendra and compromise. You seem to have dismissed completely and are unable to contemplate the Idea that a country can be frer, sovereign and independent of the EU and successful.. might not be easy to get there but it might be best....and of course you disregard the sovereign and democratic argument......yes, very important to me and are the basis, I believe, of s good economy. The EU is not particularly working out very well for tge young people of Greece and Spain briefingsforbrexit.com/a-wto-based-brexit-could-yield-the-uk-80-billion-per-year/Fair post. I genuinely think we would be a successful country inside or outside the EU. But because we spent 50 years getting married, inside is where we are, I think the pros outweigh the cons but it's close and I get others may disagree. But because inside is where we are it will take us as long again and cost us a kings ransom to get properly out, which will be damaging. And when we finally have the world will have moved on. My ideal , and it won't happen would be an inner and outer EU. Inner for countries like Germany and France who have common borders and really believe in a United States. Outer for us and perhaps say the Scandinavian countries who value the free trade but maybe not so much the rest. But you can't have Europe a large carte as they used to say!
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 24, 2019 14:44:26 GMT
Going back to the OP, my guess now is; No concensus until April 12 so ask and agree a lengthy extension with a view to a new Referendum. The Referendum quesition: a choice between a new deal organised by the interim leader of the Tories ( Norway minus =Remain) or Remain ie no BREXIT option. Or in the interim there could be a general election, with the new government ending up in the same place.......unless headway is made by Brexit parties and reselected Tory MPs. The irony being that in any EU elections we become more Eurosceptic as does the rest of Europe.....so a greater divide between our political masters and the people. This could go on for years. The problem with the cliff-edger or WTO Brexit or whatever you want to call it which I think you favour, even if you don't care about the economy and how pensions and benefits and the NHS will be funded, is two fold. It does nothing for the 48% of people who voted remain, who lets not delude ourselves, pay a fuck sight more tax in total than the leavers. Perhaps you don't care about the people who voted remain anyway, but even if you don't the second problem is a large number of your leavers never voted to leave with no deal with our major trading partner the EU. You do know that only 5-8% of uk businesses export to the EU most companies will be remarkably unaffected apart from the UK resembling the hunger games post brexit if you believe everything you read. Actually everyone who voted leave voted to leave without a deal because you can not negotiate a deal with the EU until you have left the EU, the only difference between the two is whether you pay for the transition period whilst you negotiate a deal personally I see no deal focusing minds a lot quicker than carrying on paying in. You second point on doing nothing for the 48%, well is that the 48% who at first insisted the court case, then the soft brexit, then the losers vote were not about stopping brexit and are now actively via the revoke campaign just seeking to stop brexit. There is nothing you can do to satisfy those people.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 24, 2019 14:54:24 GMT
Going back to the OP, my guess now is; No concensus until April 12 so ask and agree a lengthy extension with a view to a new Referendum. The Referendum quesition: a choice between a new deal organised by the interim leader of the Tories ( Norway minus =Remain) or Remain ie no BREXIT option. Or in the interim there could be a general election, with the new government ending up in the same place.......unless headway is made by Brexit parties and reselected Tory MPs. The irony being that in any EU elections we become more Eurosceptic as does the rest of Europe.....so a greater divide between our political masters and the people. This could go on for years. The problem with the cliff-edger or WTO Brexit or whatever you want to call it which I think you favour, even if you don't care about the economy and how pensions and benefits and the NHS will be funded, is two fold. It does nothing for the 48% of people who voted remain, who lets not delude ourselves, pay a fuck sight more tax in total than the leavers. Perhaps you don't care about the people who voted remain anyway, but even if you don't the second problem is a large number of your leavers never voted to leave with no deal with our major trading partner the EU. I don't see the connection with "pensions and benefits and the NHS will be funded" and being in the EU. The UK taxpayer pays for everything the Government spends (and borrows) and and pays for EU membership. We get no financial benefit from the EU. Secondly what has what people pay in tax got to do with democracy. Are you suggesting those who pay more tax should have more of a say in running the country? I do care for those who want to stay in the EU; I honestly believe they are wrong and will be better off in the long run as with the rest of us. We don't have a trading partner called the EU; we trade with individual countries and we actually trade with the people and companies, organizations in those countries not with their governments. Over half of our trade is with the USA, Germany, Netherlands, France, Ireland, China, and Switzerland. We have massive trade deficits with Germany and Netherlands so they are hardly going to want to damage trade with us. The growth nations are China, USA, and Germany. The only country we are likely to damage relationships with is France - so what's new? On the other side of the coin we have a massive chance to improve trading with the old commonwealth countries and Japan, and the tiger economies of the Pacific rim. Over 90% of future economic growth will be outside the EU, which will become less and less significant in our trade. We now live in a world economy. Apart from all the above, the EU is undemocratic as, it appears, are all those who want to stay in the EU. I would prefer we left with a good deal, but "no deal is better than a bad deal".
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Mar 24, 2019 15:15:30 GMT
How many Eastern Europeans were expected to come to Britain? Which has what to do with Turkey joining the EU? Absolutely nothing. Turkey will not be joining the EU as long as France has a say (so never then). This was a bullshit line pushed during the referendum and is bullshit now. It's to do with what is called bullshit one day, becoming the truth.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Mar 24, 2019 15:20:03 GMT
It does nothing for the 48% of people who voted remain, who lets not delude ourselves, pay a fuck sight more tax in total than the leavers. We've had three years being told that the rich/wealthy voted for Leave, now you're changing it & telling us they voted Remain instead? Should we run this country on how wealthy you are? Poor people have to give up their seats for rich people? Give up their drinking water? The air they breath? And what would remaining have done for the 52% who voted leave? How many fucks would you have given about us? I think Gods's post sums up the divide in Britain perfectly. Brexit has just highlighted it, it was always there.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Mar 24, 2019 15:58:01 GMT
Gods I do care about the economy, but no one csn predict in reality what is best/ where we will be in 10 years time ( see links below) The Referendum was about making a clear decision...and people voted out....so no I don't think that there should be any compromise whatsoever. What should have happened is that Parliament and Remainers should have accepted the result. ( I don't particularly like Piers Morgan but his sentiment below I agree with m Don't let's kid ourselves, if Remain had won we simply would not have been contemplating second referendra and compromise. You seem to have dismissed completely and are unable to contemplate the Idea that a country can be frer, sovereign and independent of the EU and successful.. might not be easy to get there but it might be best....and of course you disregard the sovereign and democratic argument......yes, very important to me and are the basis, I believe, of s good economy. The EU is not particularly working out very well for tge young people of Greece and Spain briefingsforbrexit.com/a-wto-based-brexit-could-yield-the-uk-80-billion-per-year/Fair post. I genuinely think we would be a successful country inside or outside the EU. But because we spent 50 years getting married, inside is where we are, I think the pros outweigh the cons but it's close and I get others may disagree. But because inside is where we are it will take us as long again and cost us a kings ransom to get properly out, which will be damaging. And when we finally have the world will have moved on. My ideal , and it won't happen would be an inner and outer EU. Inner for countries like Germany and France who have common borders and really believe in a United States. Outer for us and perhaps say the Scandinavian countries who value the free trade but maybe not so much the rest. But you can't have Europe a large carte as they used to say! Gods just on your last two last points.....( A big if but ) If I was in agreement with some sort of model for a United Europe I can agree to some extent with your point of a two tier Europe. I can never see the Northern European countries, with the exception of Italy, ever " disuniting" , having no borders/ separate currencies....and I can see the sense in that...BUT what suits them does not necessarily suit Greece, Hungary and Poland for example....the ONLY reason that the latter two are sticking with the project is because of the great economic and financial benefits that they enjoy ( and possibly that the EU may well seem better than Soviet occupation).....BUT herein lies one major problem with the EU.... it is incapable of listening and catering for alot of difference....it's top down , anti democratic and has a mission of Ever Closer Political and Economic union that is sacrosanct.....Union...one policy, one flag, one army....etc...(see Suzanne Evans below). there is no getting away from that no matter how much you want to talk about trade.....Of course all the businesses across Europe and the UK want to trade, but the 4 freedom s of the EU are not needed for that, certainly not in the way that the EU imposes them. The idea is to erode National sovereignty and identity and to replace it with the European citizen. I don't want that but if people do, make it part of the debate..... those that favour Remain never address it , pretend that it does not exist or is not important. On your final point....an a la carte EU is exactly what the UK have wanted ( no Schengen, no Euro)..... what concerns me is that this will not be tolerated for ever simply because the Euro is central to the control and is in all the treaties....and the mission is Ever Closer Union......one day we will have to decide ( and unlike your argument about a 52/48 split, we will either adopt the Euro or not..... some decisions are not about compromise). So for me to stay in is not about the status quo but is about change....in a direction in which I don't want to go. I am very much a pragmatist. In reality we have never been great Europhiles.....we will never relate to Brussels as the centre of our Political existence for reasons of geography and history. Hence the Eurosceptic presence at the Euro elections. Why sign up for an organisation when you don't believe in the basic purpose? ( that has been hidden from us since 1973 and on which we have had NO say)
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Mar 24, 2019 16:13:12 GMT
Fair post. I genuinely think we would be a successful country inside or outside the EU. But because we spent 50 years getting married, inside is where we are, I think the pros outweigh the cons but it's close and I get others may disagree. But because inside is where we are it will take us as long again and cost us a kings ransom to get properly out, which will be damaging. And when we finally have the world will have moved on. My ideal , and it won't happen would be an inner and outer EU. Inner for countries like Germany and France who have common borders and really believe in a United States. Outer for us and perhaps say the Scandinavian countries who value the free trade but maybe not so much the rest. But you can't have Europe a large carte as they used to say! Gods just on your last two last points.....( A big if but ) If I was in agreement with some sort of model for a United Europe I can agree to some extent with your point of a two tier Europe. I can never see the Northern European countries, with the exception of Italy, ever " disuniting" , having no borders/ separate currencies....and I can see the sense in that...BUT what suits them does not necessarily suit Greece, Hungary and Poland for example....the ONLY reason that the latter two are sticking with the project is because of the great economic and financial benefits that they enjoy ( and possibly that the EU may well seem better than Soviet occupation).....BUT herein lies one major problem with the EU.... it is incapable of listening and catering for alot of difference....it's top down , anti democratic and has a mission of Ever Closer Political and Economic union that is sacrosanct.....Union...one policy, one flag, one army....etc...(see Suzanne Evans below). there is no getting away from that no matter how much you want to talk about trade.....Of course all the businesses across Europe and the UK want to trade, but the 4 freedom s of the EU are not needed for thst, certainly not in the way that the EU imposes them. The idea is to erode National sovereignty and identity snd to replace it with the European citizen. On your final point....an a la carte EU is exactly what the UK have wanted ( no Schengen, no Euro)..... what concerns me is that this will not be tolerated for ever simply because the Euro is central to the control and is in all the treaties....and the mission is Ever Closer Union......one day we will have to decide ( and unlike your argument about a 52/48 split, we will either adopt the Euro or not..... some decisions are not about compromise. So for me to stay in is not about the status quo but is about change....in a direction that I don't want to go in. I am very much a pragmatist. In reality we have never been great Europhiles.....we will never relate to Brussels as the centre of our Political existence for reasons of geography and history. Hence the Eurosceptic presence at the Euro elections. Why sign up for an organisation when you don't believe in the basic purpose? ( that has been hidden from us since 1973 snd on which we have had NO say) Nicely summed up. Can somebody explain to me why a trade organisation needs an army? Can you imagine explaining this one to the voters back in 1975.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Mar 24, 2019 16:16:17 GMT
Gods just on your last two last points.....( A big if but ) If I was in agreement with some sort of model for a United Europe I can agree to some extent with your point of a two tier Europe. I can never see the Northern European countries, with the exception of Italy, ever " disuniting" , having no borders/ separate currencies....and I can see the sense in that...BUT what suits them does not necessarily suit Greece, Hungary and Poland for example....the ONLY reason that the latter two are sticking with the project is because of the great economic and financial benefits that they enjoy ( and possibly that the EU may well seem better than Soviet occupation).....BUT herein lies one major problem with the EU.... it is incapable of listening and catering for alot of difference....it's top down , anti democratic and has a mission of Ever Closer Political and Economic union that is sacrosanct.....Union...one policy, one flag, one army....etc...(see Suzanne Evans below). there is no getting away from that no matter how much you want to talk about trade.....Of course all the businesses across Europe and the UK want to trade, but the 4 freedom s of the EU are not needed for thst, certainly not in the way that the EU imposes them. The idea is to erode National sovereignty and identity snd to replace it with the European citizen. On your final point....an a la carte EU is exactly what the UK have wanted ( no Schengen, no Euro)..... what concerns me is that this will not be tolerated for ever simply because the Euro is central to the control and is in all the treaties....and the mission is Ever Closer Union......one day we will have to decide ( and unlike your argument about a 52/48 split, we will either adopt the Euro or not..... some decisions are not about compromise. So for me to stay in is not about the status quo but is about change....in a direction that I don't want to go in. I am very much a pragmatist. In reality we have never been great Europhiles.....we will never relate to Brussels as the centre of our Political existence for reasons of geography and history. Hence the Eurosceptic presence at the Euro elections. Why sign up for an organisation when you don't believe in the basic purpose? ( that has been hidden from us since 1973 snd on which we have had NO say) Nicely summed up. Can somebody explain to me why a trade organisation needs an army? Can you imagine explaining this one to the voters back in 1975. Because Yanksville have told them that they’re not going to foot the bill for all the worlds conflicts any longer.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 24, 2019 16:25:17 GMT
How many Eastern Europeans were expected to come to Britain? Which has what to do with Turkey joining the EU? Absolutely nothing. Turkey will not be joining the EU as long as France has a say (so never then). This was a bullshit line pushed during the referendum and is bullshit now. Why have the EU spent 9 billion Euro on Turkey trying to get them up to the standard errrrmmmmm required for integration if there is no chance of it happening ? , the French will roll over as they always have when the Germans come knocking, they will need the Turks to man their new EU army once we have hopefully fcuked off, problem is who will pay for it
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 24, 2019 16:26:42 GMT
Which has what to do with Turkey joining the EU? Absolutely nothing. Turkey will not be joining the EU as long as France has a say (so never then). This was a bullshit line pushed during the referendum and is bullshit now. It's to do with what is called bullshit one day, becoming the truth. So is Turkey joining the EU? No. Project Fear from Brexiteers.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 24, 2019 16:27:17 GMT
Nicely summed up. Can somebody explain to me why a trade organisation needs an army? Can you imagine explaining this one to the voters back in 1975. Because Yanksville have told them that they’re not going to foot the bill for all the worlds conflicts any longer. Good then we won't have to help them out when they fcuk it up as usual, we won't have to fight any one else's war if we leave the EU then
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 24, 2019 16:32:04 GMT
Which has what to do with Turkey joining the EU? Absolutely nothing. Turkey will not be joining the EU as long as France has a say (so never then). This was a bullshit line pushed during the referendum and is bullshit now. Why have the EU spent 9 billion Euro on Turkey trying to get them up to the standard errrrmmmmm required for integration if there is no chance of it happening ? , the French will roll over as they always have when the Germans come knocking, they will need the Turks to man their new EU army once we have hopefully fcuked off, problem is who will pay for it Turkey is getting cozy with Russia currently. Even Boris has stopped pushing the Turkey joining the EU line, it's nonsense. This is part of the problem with the whole Brexiteers debate too much rubbish about.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 24, 2019 16:33:41 GMT
It's to do with what is called bullshit one day, becoming the truth. So is Turkey joining the EU? No. Project Fear from Brexiteers. Why are you answering your own question ?
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 24, 2019 16:35:38 GMT
Why have the EU spent 9 billion Euro on Turkey trying to get them up to the standard errrrmmmmm required for integration if there is no chance of it happening ? , the French will roll over as they always have when the Germans come knocking, they will need the Turks to man their new EU army once we have hopefully fcuked off, problem is who will pay for it Turkey is getting cozy with Russia currently. Even Boris has stopped pushing the Turkey joining the EU line, it's nonsense. This is part of the problem with the whole Brexiteers debate too much rubbish about. I get the EU have wasted 9 billion for nothing, not that long ago we were told there was no way there would be an EU army guess what
|
|
|
Post by claytonscrubs on Mar 24, 2019 16:37:09 GMT
We've had three years being told that the rich/wealthy voted for Leave, now you're changing it & telling us they voted Remain instead? Should we run this country on how wealthy you are? Poor people have to give up their seats for rich people? Give up their drinking water? The air they breath? And what would remaining have done for the 52% who voted leave? How many fucks would you have given about us? I think Gods's post sums up the divide in Britain perfectly. Brexit has just highlighted it, it was always there. I agree... When it comes to Brexit passions run high, that's obvious. I'm just pleased that both sides of the fence can express their views on here without being moderated!
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Mar 24, 2019 17:53:17 GMT
At least we've got the Eurovision cracked this year( by this youthful, diverse, working class ( could be ?) choir?)
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Mar 24, 2019 18:08:26 GMT
It's to do with what is called bullshit one day, becoming the truth. So is Turkey joining the EU? No. Project Fear from Brexiteers. Interestingly Lord the EU army was cited by Cameron as part of project fear.
I think Turkey can't be allowed to join because it doesn't meet the strict criteria. A bit like Greece.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 24, 2019 18:15:39 GMT
So is Turkey joining the EU? No. Project Fear from Brexiteers. Interestingly Lord the EU army was cited by Cameron as part of project fear.
I think Turkey can't be allowed to join because it doesn't meet the strict criteria. A bit like Greece.
Greece that went well, great example of due diligence not been carried out by the EU. more of a land grab that went well a bit tits up.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Mar 24, 2019 18:15:51 GMT
Nicely summed up. Can somebody explain to me why a trade organisation needs an army? Can you imagine explaining this one to the voters back in 1975. Because Yanksville have told them that they’re not going to foot the bill for all the worlds conflicts any longer. That would be the country that's kept the peace in Europe since 1945 through NATO. Perhaps the EU needs it's army when it secures Ukraine. Perhaps the USA are right not to fund the Europe's disputes when they would be avoidable but for the expansionism going on under the EU.
The last thing I would imagine Russia being happy with is a border with Greater Germanie.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Mar 24, 2019 18:16:52 GMT
Interestingly Lord the EU army was cited by Cameron as part of project fear.
I think Turkey can't be allowed to join because it doesn't meet the strict criteria. A bit like Greece.
Greece that went well, great example of due diligence not been carried out by the EU. more of a land grab that went well a bit tits up. There is no diligence it's just like watching the USSR all over again.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Mar 24, 2019 18:19:07 GMT
Because Yanksville have told them that they’re not going to foot the bill for all the worlds conflicts any longer. That would be the country that's kept the peace in Europe since 1945 through NATO. Perhaps the EU needs it's army when it secures Ukraine. Perhaps the USA are right not to fund the Europe's disputes when they would be avoidable but for the expansionism going on under the EU.
The last thing I would imagine Russia being happy with is a border with Greater Germanie.
Felonious Verhostadt can be a bit provocative .... imagine infering that the EU has got designs on expanding to the Volga . I'm sure that has gone down well in the USSR. ( 6 minutes onwards)
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Mar 24, 2019 18:20:12 GMT
Why have the EU spent 9 billion Euro on Turkey trying to get them up to the standard errrrmmmmm required for integration if there is no chance of it happening ? , the French will roll over as they always have when the Germans come knocking, they will need the Turks to man their new EU army once we have hopefully fcuked off, problem is who will pay for it Turkey is getting cozy with Russia currently. Even Boris has stopped pushing the Turkey joining the EU line, it's nonsense. This is part of the problem with the whole Brexiteers debate too much rubbish about. Remoaners constantly talked about a 'reformed EU'. Put it this way, there's more chance of Turkey being in it than reforming it.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Mar 24, 2019 18:37:16 GMT
That would be the country that's kept the peace in Europe since 1945 through NATO. Perhaps the EU needs it's army when it secures Ukraine. Perhaps the USA are right not to fund the Europe's disputes when they would be avoidable but for the expansionism going on under the EU.
The last thing I would imagine Russia being happy with is a border with Greater Germanie.
Felonious Verhostadt can be a bit provocative .... imagine infering that the EU has got designs on expanding to the Volga . I'm sure that has gone down well in the USSR. ( 6 minutes onwards) Mad as a hatter. Interesting that he should have a dig at Thatcher who used her office to broker peace between Russia and the USA.
|
|