Jump to content

Brexit


Corinthian
 Share

Recommended Posts

There is currently a LOT of speculation here, that Trumps election might actually be a good thing for the UK. He is likely (at least if he sticks by any of what he says in the election) going kill TTIP, which would mean that we likely (again if he sticks by his word) are actually going to be first in the queue for a trade deal with the US.

 

Of course its rather a lot to expect a politician is going to stick by what he says, but I think the media might have a point here. The man is if nothing else an Anglophile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

 

Well its either that or get the Welsh or the Scots in. The last time we had a Scottish King, there was a civil war. The last time we had a Welsh King, we invaded half of Europe. German Kings (here at any rate) have either been mad, indolent, ineffectual, or at their best, all three. Why mess with a winning combination :)

...and now america got one too!

http://genealogy.about.com/od/famous_family_trees/p/trump.htm

 

The last time the US had a German President he had just won WWII. And then he went on to play a lot of golf.

 

I think Trump will go for a 1 on 1 trade deal with the UK. One to put a thumb in the eye of the Euros who mocked him. And, two get away from those multi-country monstrosity trade deals which have to be enforced by some sort of committee. If a 1 on 1 deal goes bad it can be withdrawn without huge disruptions in world wide trade.

Edited by Mobius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Trump will go for a 1 on 1 trade deal with the UK. One to put a thumb in the eye of the Euros who mocked him. And, two get away from those multi-country monstrosity trade deals which have to be enforced by some sort of committee. If a 1 on 1 deal goes bad it can be withdrawn without huge disruptions in world wide trade.

This is one area where Trump is way ahead of Clinton. Hillary view trade deals through the lens of her kleptocratic organization; how can a proposed treaty/agreement make me richer? When the diplos are at the banquet table, there rarely seems to be mention of an objective cost/benefit analysis.

 

Lets hope that Trump works more on trade agreements with nations that have the same vocabulary, values, and ethics as the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Wales and Scotland would like to have a say in the matter:

 

Brexit: Fresh blow for Theresa May as Supreme Court rules Scotland and Wales can intervene in Article 50 triggering

 

Edinburgh and Cardiff will be allowed to argue for the right to have a say over the triggering of the Article 50 notice period

 

 

The Supreme Court today threw a further hurdle in the way of Theresa Mays hopes of a smooth Brexit, when it ruled the Scottish and Welsh governments can intervene.

Edinburgh and Cardiff will be allowed to make their separate cases to the court for the right to have a say over the triggering of the Article 50 notice period.

The decision raises the possibility albeit thought to be slim of the Supreme Court agreeing with the SNP that the Scottish Parliament should have a veto over the Brexit strategy.

That would plunge the United Kingdom into a full-blown constitutional crisis, as well as potentially sink the Prime Ministers exit timetable.

 

The decision is a big victory for Nicola Sturgeon, the SNPs first minister, who has insisted Scotlands voice must be heard after the country voted decisively to Remain.

The Government's appeal against the High Court ruling that MPs must give their consent to the invoking of Article 50 will be heard, over four days, from December 5.

The decision is expected at the start of January, after which if it loses the Government will introduce a short three-line Bill to try to keep Brexit on track.

Ms May has said she will trigger Article 50 by the end of March, beginning two years of formal exit talks expected to conclude with Britain leaving the EU in spring 2019.

Now counsel for the Scottish Government will be allowed to argue that Brexit, as planned by Ms May, is likely to have a decisive impact on the devolution settlement and the law in Scotland.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-fresh-blow-for-theresa-may-as-supreme-court-rules-scotland-and-wales-can-intervene-in-article-a7424796.html

 

 

ah yes it was to be a quick brexit, wasn't it? Those sabotaging scots and welsh! ^_^

Edited by Panzermann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, if I borrowed 50 people to contribute, there still isnt enough hands for the facepalm I feel right now.

 

 

 

There was this yesterday as well, though UKIP seem to have weathered the storm like you would expect from greasy self serving shits.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage-denies-using-eu-money-to-fund-ukip-election-campaign-a3398616.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wales and Scotland would like to have a say in the matter:

 

Brexit: Fresh blow for Theresa May as Supreme Court rules Scotland and Wales can intervene in Article 50 triggering

 

Edinburgh and Cardiff will be allowed to argue for the right to have a say over the triggering of the Article 50 notice period

 

 

The Supreme Court today threw a further hurdle in the way of Theresa Mays hopes of a smooth Brexit, when it ruled the Scottish and Welsh governments can intervene.

Edinburgh and Cardiff will be allowed to make their separate cases to the court for the right to have a say over the triggering of the Article 50 notice period.

The decision raises the possibility albeit thought to be slim of the Supreme Court agreeing with the SNP that the Scottish Parliament should have a veto over the Brexit strategy.

That would plunge the United Kingdom into a full-blown constitutional crisis, as well as potentially sink the Prime Ministers exit timetable.

 

The decision is a big victory for Nicola Sturgeon, the SNPs first minister, who has insisted Scotlands voice must be heard after the country voted decisively to Remain.

The Government's appeal against the High Court ruling that MPs must give their consent to the invoking of Article 50 will be heard, over four days, from December 5.

The decision is expected at the start of January, after which if it loses the Government will introduce a short three-line Bill to try to keep Brexit on track.

Ms May has said she will trigger Article 50 by the end of March, beginning two years of formal exit talks expected to conclude with Britain leaving the EU in spring 2019.

Now counsel for the Scottish Government will be allowed to argue that Brexit, as planned by Ms May, is likely to have a decisive impact on the devolution settlement and the law in Scotland.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-fresh-blow-for-theresa-may-as-supreme-court-rules-scotland-and-wales-can-intervene-in-article-a7424796.html

 

 

ah yes it was to be a quick brexit, wasn't it? Those sabotaging scots and welsh! ^_^

 

I would ask where anyone of any standing over here said anything about a quick Brexit, but you don't really care about that any more than the SNP care about anything but breaking up the UK. You'd best get over it buttercup, the people over here have spoken and Brexit is going to happen irrespective of how many special snowflake Remoaner newspaper articles you manage to trawl up from the interweb to get all moist about.

 

Why don't you tell us again how having a decent mode of transport for the head of state is a symbol of imperial hegemony or whatever dribble you were spouting last time.

 

BillB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, if I borrowed 50 people to contribute, there still isnt enough hands for the facepalm I feel right now.

 

 

 

There was this yesterday as well, though UKIP seem to have weathered the storm like you would expect from greasy self serving shits.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage-denies-using-eu-money-to-fund-ukip-election-campaign-a3398616.html

Stangely enough, that's exactly how I feel everytime I happen upon whinging and carping from bad loser Remoaners. Am looking forward to Farage being ennobled for his service to the UK in creating the opportunity for the disregarded mass of the voting public to have a say, if only to see all the wonderful teeth gnashing, wailing and bitter snowflake tears...

 

BillB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill, we voted to leave, I therefore think we should leave. I even think it should be a complete Brexit, because thats what the people voted for, disastrous though it undoubtedly will be (as even the Conservatives now concede with it leaving a 100 billion hole in the budget) Yet despite my volte face on the subject, it hasn't changed my basic position that Farrage is a self serving shit, and he continues to reinforce the impression with every bleat about what a useful intermediary he would be to President Trump. Despite having had the bad grace to kick him loose when he saw Trump was damaging his reputation, such as it was.

 

Farrage Enobled? What for, he didnt do anything, other than tell the public how safe the NHS would be with a mythical economic stimulus from the EU Funds, and how the Europeans would bend over backwards to accommodate us. How about we actually leave and see the effects, before we decide whether the man is worth enobling or depositing on Traitors gate, hmmm?

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to mention the vote was for Brexit, not for a specific method and was not a carte blanche for (funny, unelected) Prime Minister. Plus if you want to avoid further trouble, maybe try to addressthe concerns of regions (pretty significant) that voted predominantly Remain instead of insulting them.

 

Especially as one of those regions had pretty recently rešferendum where stayin in EU was one of the main arguments for staying in the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

ah yes it was to be a quick brexit, wasn't it? Those sabotaging scots and welsh! ^_^

 

I would ask where anyone of any standing over here said anything about a quick Brexit, but you don't really care about that any more than the SNP care about anything but breaking up the UK. You'd best get over it buttercup, the people over here have spoken and Brexit is going to

The people have spoken in a non binding vote. So parliament can still decide any way it likes. How long do you think brexit voters are going to be patient, when government in typical governmental fashion drags out applying for actual brexit over what? ten, twenty, thirty years? Yes May promised for spring, but let us wait and see what is going to actually happen.. And the rest of the European Union is totally going to accept a drawn out brexit. Not.

 

And surprising that the Scotish National Party that has written independence all over its programme is throwing wrenches. Wow. It is their reason for their existence. And Scotland had been promised to stay and now they don't. Funny that they are not amused.

 

 

happen irrespective of how many special snowflake Remoaner newspaper articles you manage to trawl up from the interweb to get all moist about.

 

I have no problem for hitting below the belt line, too. It is not my problem that your woman does not get moist for you. That I pull it out harder than you have ever put it in, she told me last week when I brought my steel rod.

 

 

See? I can easily do this too, but I normally refrain from such rude behaviour.

 

 

Why don't you tell us again how having a decent mode of transport for the head of state is a symbol of imperial hegemony or whatever dribble you were spouting last time.

 

BillB

HMS Britannia is a museum piece. a rusty relic that no one wants to pay to refurbish. Neither the Royal Navy nor the queen herself, although she could afford to. She is no paper after all. She loves the ship and probably shed a tear, but does not love it enough to pay for it herself. Nobody would have stopped her from buying it, but her majesty chose not to despite her sentimental feelings for the yacht.

 

And my crystal ball tells me that in practice if Britannia was back in service only a small crew would sail to a destination and the rest of the staff, the queen and the Royal Marine Band would be flown in to board the ship for the show of arrival. Flag waving crowd and all. You know, Queen and RM Band have packed schedules that are best served flying. So, why not use an aeroplane in the first place?

 

Looking forward and not living in a sentimental last is what kept Elizabeth her throne. She may head an institution that many a republican sees as an obsolete museum piece from the past, Queen Elizabeth II. as a person handles her job very very good, because she is firmly standing on tradition but not living in the past. She always seems to me to be actually still be curious and forward looking. If she were not, republicans would have more luck with their cause in Britain. I cannot imagine a better fit for the job of head of state of UK. Of any country really. When I look at some of the presidents we had... well. <_< But it hinges on Elizabeth's personality. Another monarch might wreck it.

 

 

But that does not change my assessment that HMS Britannia is a museum piece. Staring at the past, the "good old times", sentimentality does not bring you far and at best brings you stagnation.

 

Really, you seem to not have gotten the memo or not yet digested, that the empire is no more. The museum piece, this rusty relic would be fitting the sentimentality, but no one wants to pay for it anymore obviously.

 

Thinking about it, why not put HMS Victory back into the fleet? She is a ship with lots of battle honours. Or HMS Dreadnought while you are turning the UK into a historical theme park. I am sure you will still not get it and continue dreaming of a romantic rosy past of imperial splendor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally speaking, im all for making HMS Belfast seaworthy again. Though she is already ideally placed to fire on parliament, perish the thought that there would ever be a requirement to do so.

 

Ive no problem with madge having a mobile throne. Though I cant help but think the Voyager fitted out with the fancy carpet and the drinks cabinet is suitable enough for the purpose. The only reason Britannia was built in the first place was a seamobile regional seat of Government. It was a poorly developed concept at the time, and she is now probably as seaworthy as the Admiral Kuznetsov, and about as cheap to run. Ive fond memories of it at the 1984 D Day Anniversary at Portsmouth. But its had its day. Nobody talks of making the Queen Mary seaworthy again do they? No.

 

Speaking here for everyone I speak to, everyone is pig sick of Brexit. Many have already said they would now vote against it if given the opportunity. Everyone whom I have spoken to whom DID actually vote for it said they never actually thought it would happen. Which tells us that nobody really though through the consequences of any of this. Though I think we established that several pages back.

 

Nobody in Europe should kid themselves though, Brexit, short of atomic strike or Jeremy Corbyn becoming President for life, will happen. Forget all the stuff about it being non binding. Forget that the Jocks are throwing the toys out the pram. Forget that its potentially going to cause problems in Northern Ireland. Its too late. The ship has sailed. Anyone thinking there should have been a different result, or there is some accommodation, or some way out of the impasse, its too late. We had our suppression of the monasteries moment. Its the will of the people, and for that reason will be stuck with, and in my view, should be stuck with. That they were misled when making the decision, too bad. Maybe it suggests everyone on both sides of the channel should have thought the consequences through and taken the whole thing more seriously. Too bad.

 

Do I feel vindicated so far? Absolutely. Do I feel it makes any difference? Not really. I just wish we would get on with it, so those whom advocated it as a great idea will be tainted by it, rather than leaving it to the next generation to sweep up the bloody mess its going to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to get out of Brexit, you can just make a deal of sorts with the EU, have a new vote and Bob's your uncle. Denmark voted no the Maastricht Treaty in 1992 with 50,7 % voting no and 49,3 % voting yes. A year later, after negotiations and a few bones thrown in the direction of Denmark, giving som of the nay-sayers a fig-leaf to hide their shame with, a new vote was 56,7 % yes and 43,3 % no.

 

It did result in some lively action on the streets of Copenhagen (worst riots since WW2), but the omelet was made.

 

British politicians can do the same, if they have the balls.

 

But it would probably be good for Britain to stay out of the EU for a while. Either you will succed, which will be good. Or you will fail miserably, which may remove whatever delusions of imperial grandeur that still lingers on.

 

Btw. I seem recalling that Farrage and UKIP was under investigation for mis-use of EU funds channeled through the Alliance for Direct Democracy in Europe grouping in the EU parlaiment. Just like our own Danish right-wing anti-EU party Danish Peoples Party and Front National in France. Non Olet, I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend of my father (a non Socialist one evidently) made several million in a road haulage firm he owned several years ago. Anyway, he regularly visits a villa he has in Portugal. Now admittedly he was one whom voted to leave the EU and probably not unbiased, but he told my father that pretty much everyone he meets in Portugal whom realises he is English congratulates him on Brexit, and says they hope soon Portugal will have the opportunity to do the same thing.

 

Everyone criticises the British politicians for this mess, quite rightly in my view, at least in part. But it strikes me for the Europeans at least, its far easier to do that, than do the soul searching of quite why the British left. And unless they do, they stand a good chance of more than one nation going out the same door. People are profoundly tired of open borders, and an inability of the EU commission to actually listen to what nation states really want. Even the Communists were smart enough to realise one size fits all doesn't really work.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This why Brussels wants hard Brexit. Pour discourager les autres.

Absolutely. And it was Farrage and a few of his mates that assured us we would be given an easy ride, simply because the Germans want to trade with us.Some of us doubted that, and we seem increasingly borne out by events. It was always going to be a hard Brexit, we were kidding ourselves if we ever thought different. After all, Its not the Germans whom will make the call on this, its Brussels.

 

This made me chuckle.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/22/donald-trump-recommends-nigel-farage-british-ambassador-united/

Donald Trump recommends Nigel Farage for British ambassador to the United States - but No10 tells him 'there's no vacancy'

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone suggested over here that we request Bruce Springsteen as Ambassador. I dont know why we dont ask for Hillary Clinton, just for the comedy value like. :)

 

Yes, please, request that!

 

I, for one, do not want her numerous and expensive afflictions (including alcoholism, I think) to be billed to the American taxpayer. Y'all keep touting the wonderfulness of NHS; show me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this is the right place or not, but it was clearly tangentially related to Brexit.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38079594

Thomas Mair has been jailed for life after being found guilty of the murder of Labour MP Jo Cox.

The 53-year-old shot and stabbed to death the mother-of-two in Birstall, West Yorkshire, on 16 June, a week before the EU referendum vote.

Mair shouted "Britain First" in the attack, but the judge said the true "patriot" was Mrs Cox, not Mair.

Prosecutors said Mair was motivated by hate and his crimes were "nothing less than acts of terrorism".

Mair was also found guilty of having a firearm with intent, causing grievous bodily harm with intent to 78-year-old Bernard Kenny, who tried to help the MP, and having an offensive weapon, namely a dagger.

Link to comment
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...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...