Jump to content
tanknet.org

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium? Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.

There's your problem right there. What Britain should be is America's north Atlantic aircraft carrier, and our source of affordable, literate acting talent. Anything more than that is just delusions of grandeur.

 

Oh, and home of Kelly Brook. Yeah, I think that sums it up.

 

Generally on these threads, it usually boils down to the false dichotomy of independent Britain versus euroclone. In the age of global marketplaces, the independent Britain metaphor won't work, as int'l trade is the difference between wealth and poverty (heck, it always has been). But the euroclone option always reads to me like ObamaCare; "Its really a better way, despite all those statistics and anecdotes. Trust us, its way better!" Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium? Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.

There's your problem right there. What Britain should be is America's north Atlantic aircraft carrier, and our source of affordable, literate acting talent. Anything more than that is just delusions of grandeur.

 

Oh, and home of Kelly Brook. Yeah, I think that sums it up.

 

Generally on these threads, it usually boils down to the false dichotomy of independent Britain versus euroclone. In the age of global marketplaces, the independent Britain metaphor won't work, as int'l trade is the difference between wealth and poverty (heck, it always has been). But the euroclone option always reads to me like ObamaCare; "Its really a better way, despite all those statistics and anecdotes. Trust us, its way better!" Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

 

 

You clearly need Donald Trump to negotiate those deals. You can have him. You are welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium? Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.

There's your problem right there. What Britain should be is America's north Atlantic aircraft carrier, and our source of affordable, literate acting talent. Anything more than that is just delusions of grandeur.

 

Oh, and home of Kelly Brook. Yeah, I think that sums it up.

 

Generally on these threads, it usually boils down to the false dichotomy of independent Britain versus euroclone. In the age of global marketplaces, the independent Britain metaphor won't work, as int'l trade is the difference between wealth and poverty (heck, it always has been). But the euroclone option always reads to me like ObamaCare; "Its really a better way, despite all those statistics and anecdotes. Trust us, its way better!" Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

 

 

You clearly need Donald Trump to negotiate those deals. You can have him. You are welcome.

 

Um. How does no thanks grab you. :D

 

You illustrate another problem with Britains position as the European bridge, Americas estrangement with its oldest allies. That was true during the Bush White house (when lets be fair he did little to endear himself with Europe, or his lack of interest in what Britain thought was a good idea), continued under Obama (like what kind of clueless fuckwit sends a statue of Churchill back?) and if Trump gets to choose the decor in the Oval office looks set to be sealed.

 

There is an excellent chance in the near future that Britain can find itself divorced from the EU, its relationship with the US in shambles, and NATO defunct. God knows the EU is a mess, but its at least a grouping of like minded individuals in uncertain times.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

 

59 million if Scotland wants back in the EU after a Brexit.

 

 

Making it work in the EU is probably best. Leave the EU when the day comes that German gdp growth is consistently negative.

 

Should a Brexit happen, and the UK economy grows more involved in China, maybe the Philippines has the space for hosting the Queen's Navy ships. And then join up in Malabar exercises, Cape North exercises, say hello to the Australians more often, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

The central problem is that, that Britain going it alone is a nation of 65 million. If it negotiates a trade deal with China (as it will have to do when its outside the EU I believe) its going to negotiate with a nation with a population climbing towards 1.4 Billion. Clearly in such circumstances they will laugh at us and tell us to take the deal, whether its a good one or not. Or we can negotiate as a member of the EU which, however imperfect, represents a block of population that represents 508 million. Along with the US (if they are minded to work with us in such terms) then China clearly is negotiating with a block it cant afford to ignore. One more reason why I want Russia in NATO and the EU. With both right on their borders, China would be a lot more reticent in its trade wars and military policy. :D

 

I mean I am by nature a transatlantist. Our natural position has been the bridge between Europe and America, a position it fulfilled very well during the cold war. The fly in the ointment is that US Presidents prefer to negotiate directly with Germany, as economically and militarily a surer bet. Which as far as the latter is shaky reasoning (for political reasons at least), but as far as the former, I can see the problem. They really are Europes preeminent nation, and like us seemingly have a hard job coming to terms with their position.

 

I do know one thing, becoming the next Eire (or at least the Eire that was before it joined the EEC) does not strike me as having much to commend it.

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

 

59 million if Scotland wants back in the EU after a Brexit.

 

 

Making it work in the EU is probably best. Leave the EU when the day comes that German gdp growth is consistently negative.

 

Should a Brexit happen, and the UK economy grows more involved in China, maybe the Philippines has the space for hosting the Queen's Navy ships. And then join up in Malabar exercises, Cape North exercises, say hello to the Australians more often, etc.

 

Its uncertain how realistic that threat is. Clearly the SNP have made clear they intend to have another referendum if Brexit comes through, and quite possibly next time they will be successful. Whether Westminster will be in a mind to let them, or quite what the effect will be if its denied them, is another matter.

 

Apparently even Eire wants us to stay in the EU. Their cross border trade to Northern Ireland has been quite extensive. The knock on effect that might have to the NI peace process if its curtailed and there is a rise in unemployment must also be considered.

 

There are a lot of points that must be considered. There are no really easy answers here, which is why Im so irritated with the Boris Johnsons and his ilk who all claim its all thought out and not problem at all. They said the same about the return to the gold standard IIRC...

 

I dont think our economy will grow. I think all you will see is Chinese companies buying up British ones and either asset stripping them, or running them into the ground. A prime example of that is MG Rover.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium? Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.

There's your problem right there. ...

 

Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

True - but the Brexit campaigners want at best, 1950s methods, & many seem to prefer 19th century methods. E.g. they argue that the UK (which provides the average other EU member with 6.5% of its imports of goods) is so important to the EU (which provides 47% of the UK's imports of goods) that we could dictate the terms on which we'd trade with it. Doh!

 

The only people who actually understand the UK's relative strength & the clout it would have in the world if it left the EU are campaigning to stay in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

,,,

 

Kelly Brook? Meh. Haley Atwell. But then the best things usually are half American, half British arent they. :)

 

Well there is Churchill, and of course ME....... :D :D :D

 

Well there are always exceptions....

 

Just kidding Mike, all good examples. :D

 

Lets see,

 

AC Cobra.

The Police (the group, not the doughnut eaters)

Fleetwood Mac

North American Mustang.

B57

Harrier.

M1 Abrams (105mm gun, Chobham armour)

Sacha Baron Cohen?

Jimi Hendrix (alright im stretching the point here a bit)

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A core of the problem is perhaps that Britain still after 70 years cannot decide what it is. Is it still the big imperial nation out cracking heads in the name of Anglo Saxon hegmony, or is it a European nation like Belgium? Damned if I know. Answers on a postcard please.

There's your problem right there. ...

 

Britain should be looking at 21st century methods for solving 21st century problems.

 

True - but the Brexit campaigners want at best, 1950s methods, & many seem to prefer 19th century methods. E.g. they argue that the UK (which provides the average other EU member with 6.5% of its imports of goods) is so important to the EU (which provides 47% of the UK's imports of goods) that we could dictate the terms on which we'd trade with it. Doh!

 

The only people who actually understand the UK's relative strength & the clout it would have in the world if it left the EU are campaigning to stay in.

 

Pretty much actually, yeah.

 

I mean as an emotional decision, I can understand the appeal. To stand on our own feet, unencumbered by red tape, wagging our finger at the Chinese as we used to do 150 years ago. Sure, I get the emotional appeal. But it tends to be promoted by people living in a bubble, surrounded by the old trappings of a defunct empire, in a parliament that looks and acts as if it ought to be in an episode of Wolf Hall. Hey, I like aspects of 'old Britain' But its been European Britain as long as ive been alive, and 'old' Britain was dying on its feet, its the main reason why we were banging on the door to get in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

59 million if Scotland wants back in the EU after a Brexit.

 

 

Making it work in the EU is probably best. Leave the EU when the day comes that German gdp growth is consistently negative.

 

Should a Brexit happen, and the UK economy grows more involved in China, maybe the Philippines has the space for hosting the Queen's Navy ships. And then join up in Malabar exercises, Cape North exercises, say hello to the Australians more often, etc.

 

Its uncertain how realistic that threat is. Clearly the SNP have made clear they intend to have another referendum if Brexit comes through, and quite possibly next time they will be successful. Whether Westminster will be in a mind to let them, or quite what the effect will be if its denied them, is another matter.

 

Apparently even Eire wants us to stay in the EU. Their cross border trade to Northern Ireland has been quite extensive. The knock on effect that might have to the NI peace process if its curtailed and there is a rise in unemployment must also be considered.

 

There are a lot of points that must be considered. There are no really easy answers here, which is why Im so irritated with the Boris Johnsons and his ilk who all claim its all thought out and not problem at all. They said the same about the return to the gold standard IIRC...

 

I dont think our economy will grow. I think all you will see is Chinese companies buying up British ones and either asset stripping them, or running them into the ground. A prime example of that is MG Rover.

 

 

Boris sure seems confident in being able to quickly establish FTAs after doing a Brexit. But the UK would be negotiating from a weak and vulnerable position, desperate to make deals quickly, so yeah, I think he is wrong to feel confident from my humble observations. And he seems to go on about the EU not being the place of growth in the world, while certainly it is a slow growing region with issues, but has he really giving a proper eye to China? If there was an opportunity to get in, capitalize, and then get out of China while ahead, that boat has already gone. Take a hint from Japan, they're reducing activity in China.

 

And to the bold part, I'm reminded of this article a short while ago.

 

Chinese companies' mergers and acquisitions of Korean firms are rapidly increasing, and their targets include not only manufacturers but service providers, a report said Tuesday.

 

The Chinese businesses want the technology and other know-how of their Korean partners while the latter seek to advance to the vast Chinese market dodging domestic regulations, said the Institute for International Trade report analyzing China's corporate M&A.

 

Chinese companies' M&A of Korean businesses totaled 33 last year, three times as many as in 2014. The transaction value also rose 128 percent to $1.93 billion, accounting for 70 percent of the total in the past decade.

 

Between 2006 and 2014, M&As of manufacturing companies represented 52 percent of the total. Last year, however, services companies, including insurance and entertainment, took up 73 percent of the total.

 

"To maintain the competitiveness of Korean businesses, the government needs to encourage domestic M&As and to do away with regulations toward that end," the report said.

 

For instance, the restriction on large businesses' participation in public information business discouraged mergers and acquisitions among software companies, it said. The shutdown system on online games also reduced the domestic market, increasing Korean game developers' dependence on Chinese capital.

 

"Korean businesses should regard M&As with Chinese businesses not as avoidable, but as a strategy needed for advancing to the Chinese market," the report said. "In this process, the domestic companies need to work out pragmatic M&A strategies to maintain their management basis."

 

The report said Korean companies need to think about how they could set up joint-venture businesses in China instead of being merged entirely by the Chinese firms.

 

 

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2016/03/123_200394.html

Edited by JasonJ
Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely not with their food. :P

Whats wrong with faggots and chips? Haggis and Sprouts? Nice bit of black pudding and mushy peas? :)

 

I think the greatest insult is the profusion of Polish food shops we now have in the UK. Whats wrong with when in Rome? :D

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely not with their food. :P

 

Well, I for one have been living in Australia for the last 4 years and would gladly welcome a return to colonial status if it meant I could get a decent chicken tikka massala and a proper pint of bitter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Definitely not with their food. :P

Whats wrong with faggots and chips? Haggis and Sprouts? Nice bit of black pudding and mushy peas? :)

 

I think the greatest insult is the profusion of Polish food shops we now have in the UK. Whats wrong with when in Rome? :D

 

Yeah. I can understand Indian restaurants & the like - but Polish food shops? Poland may have some great qualities, but cuisine ain't one of 'em.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brexit's a great idea and I wholeheartedly support it. It's good for the EU, and good for UK alike. Everybody wins.

 

Cameron's posturing over Brexit has been most amusing. Sensing how the idea was popular, he sucked up voters being all stern and serious about it, then he negotiated a "great deal" and suddenly is all for staying in the EU.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Compared to Britain? :P Just try some nice borscht or bigos, or all kinds of pierogi...

Borscht? Wash your mouth out! And having eaten the stuff Poles sell as Polish food here, I'll stick to good old-fashioned British food such as dhansak or samosas. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smart guy said "No food worth of mention north of Danube". I tend to agree, with minor exceptions, mostly about sweets and deserts. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brexit's a great idea and I wholeheartedly support it. It's good for the EU, and good for UK alike. Everybody wins.

 

Cameron's posturing over Brexit has been most amusing. Sensing how the idea was popular, he sucked up voters being all stern and serious about it, then he negotiated a "great deal" and suddenly is all for staying in the EU.

Its a bit more complicated than that. It was less to please the Conservative voters, than to please the Conservative back benchers whom were all threatening to jump ship to UKIP. By offering a referendum, he enabled them to stay on board, at least in the interim before the recent knife fights. Overlooking of course that the knives would come out before the referendum with the express idea of trying to get the party to get behind endorsing a Brexit. The recent move against the chancellor about disablity payments seems to have had that at the heart.

 

There is also the problem that the Conservatives have been putting a LOT of unpopular policies in their manifesto, in the logic that this particularly Government would be another coalition like the previous one. The logic was they could trade the slightly more barking policies against LIberal ones. What they didnt envisage was that the liberals would utterly collapse in the polls, and a lot of the more questionable policies (such as sunday trading or the sugar tax I believe was another) were pushed through (or in the case of sunday traded, tried to be push through) which in many cases caused some back bench discontent. its possible that the referendum was not quite the serious undertaking it appeared, and that they did intend to trade it with a Liberal party that never actually turned up as partners.

 

I doubt that most voters gave Brexit a thought at the polls. The real clincher is they didnt think Milliband was up to the job, and the Conservatives at the time looked as if they knew what they were doing. When the referendum happens, I wouldnt be surprised if the turnout is 30 percent at best. People are completely apathetic about it, or at least the ones I talk to are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...and I suppose that's where the actual danger lies, that the Euroskeptics manage to mobilize more voters to cast a decision that the (silent) majority will eventually regret, but then the damage is done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...and I suppose that's where the actual danger lies, that the Euroskeptics manage to mobilize more voters to cast a decision that the (silent) majority will eventually regret, but then the damage is done.

Exactly. Which is why we have at present the alarming spectacle of Cameron trying to snuggle up to usual dialectic opposite in Jeremy Corbyn, to try and mobilise Labour voters to make up for any Conservative voters that will vote against. Which is hilarious TBH, not least because Corbyn has been a critic of the EU for years, and is only on board the pro Europe lobby because the Unions, that Cameron is trying to put out of business, told him to. :D

 

 

A case in point. My aunt is an ex nurse, who is strongly left leaning, like my father. At the last election she voted UKIP, because she feels strongly about immigration and wanted Farage to shake things up. She also thinks we ought to leave the EU. And that is someone naturally working class and left leaning. At that point you think it really comes down to whom motivates their people most, because what is going to settle the referendum is apathy. And by God, there is a lot of it in Britain at the moment if she is any guide.

 

I think its going to come down to a knife edge. Not in votes cast either way, but in whom turns out to vote in the first place. If it starts raining it might even come down to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...