Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[SocketRocket]

Meanwhile the EU state that negotiations are over and the 'deal' is THE deal.

Except that Juncker has now been reported to have told the PM that if the UK will agree to a Customs Union he will renegotiate the 'backstop'.

So he's say HE will renegotiate! Except of course that as part of a customs union there would be no requirement for customs / border check. Does the guy live on this planet.

And we would not be able to make our own trade deals and accept EU laws and the UCJ.

 

[Old Skier]

Meanwhile the EU state that negotiations are over and the 'deal' is THE deal.

Except that Juncker has now been reported to have told the PM that if the UK will agree to a Customs Union he will renegotiate the 'backstop'.

So he's say HE will renegotiate! Except of course that as part of a customs union there would be no requirement for customs / border check. Does the guy live on this planet.

He'll say one thing, someone else will say something else but unless France and Germany agree and obviously the all important Irish fellow it's not going to happen, and then, they will all say something different tomorrow.

Been going on for weeks like that.

 

[Foxholer]

And we would not be able to make our own trade deals and accept EU laws and the UCJ.

I agree about the inability to make our own trade deals (seems a reasonable compromise imo as WTO rules would apply to non-EU countries until EU negotiates a trade deal). But where have you got the requirement to accept EU laws and the supremacy of the ECJ?

 

[SocketRocket]

I agree about the inability to make our own trade deals (seems a reasonable compromise imo as WTO rules would apply to non-EU countries until EU negotiates a trade deal). But where have you got the requirement to accept EU laws and the supremacy of the ECJ?

Surely if we are part of the customs union then we would have to accept the rules that control it, these rules are adjudicated by the ECJ

 

[Foxholer]

Surely if we are part of the customs union then we would have to accept the rules that control it, these rules are adjudicated by the ECJ

Agreed. But only in relation to issues relating to The Customs Union. Your post didn't restrict it to that!

And, presumably, you 'forgot' to restrict the requirement to be controlled by EU laws to those concerning the Customs Union also.

You are normally a bit more precise than that!

 

[SocketRocket]

Agreed. But only in relation to issues relating to The Customs Union. Your post didn't restrict it to that!

And, presumably, you 'forgot' to restrict the requirement to be controlled by EU laws to those concerning the Customs Union also.

You are normally a bit more precise than that!

Been a long day

 

[Sweep]

More twaddle, that's becoming tedious to refute!

I posted that you seem to be suggesting she sabotaged.... Kindly re-read! An apology for your selective quote would be in order! You didn't actually deny it, so please explain what you really meant in that post!

Kindly refer to your own tip - an appropriate word!

Btw. I agree with your first sentence!

So, I write a post that is very clear and either only you don’t seem to understand it or you deliberately put your own spin on it. You condemn it in insulting terms as “a load of conspiratorial theory twaddle!” Before agreeing with it in your very next post in reply to SR.
You say I am “suggesting” that May “sabotaged” the negotiations when I said or even suggested nothing of the sort. When I asked you to show me where I used the word “sabotage” you couldn’t. In my next post I clearly reiterated, just in case you were still in any doubt, that I did not say or suggest that May sabotaged the negotiations.
Now you want me to clarify my post again and you want ME to apologise!

What planet are you on?

 

[Sweep]

Ok, that’s my position.
But what about you; which to you is the lesser of two evils: deal or remain (apologies if already stated, I either missed it or forgot)?

Remain would be my absolute last choice. I believe it would be disasterous to go against the referendum result now. The damage it would do to the reputation of our parliament, our democracy, confidence in our political system and elected representatives would be catastrophic. No one would ever vote again. Apathy would reign and so soon after the Scottish independence vote that received such a huge turnout. The extremist parties would enjoy a real surge. People would feel powerless and disengaged from their own nation.
I don’t like May’s deal for the same reasons as you. I don’t fear no deal and I export to the EU on a daily basis. I would prefer that we can do a deal that works for all and I don’t want to see the EU fail.
I think if the EU had remained a trading bloc all would have been well. I just don’t believe a trading deal is worth having so much interference in the running of our own affairs by others. I think the whole EU project has been disingenuous from the start and has far outreached anything like we voted to join. I don’t trust it and I think it is this lack of trust is really what is behind so many voting to leave. I don’t believe it is democratic enough and as you can probably tell I am a democrat first and foremost.

 

[Sweep]

I try very hard to avoid making any generic or specific insulting statement directed towards any individual or indeed group of individuals. That I think the decision to leave the EU is a mad and potentially extremely damaging one for our country, does not mean or even imply that I think any individual who voted to leave is mad (or indeed potentially extremely dangerous ). However I know that it suits the agenda of some who voted to leave to suggest that it does. Because we Remoaners think that all Leavers are thick racists - right? Actually wrong.

I am not so sure about that. Here is a breathtaking tweet that I think was supposed to defend leavers against the racist accusation but in the end goes a bit wrong and the remoaner just can’t help himself:

I disagree. Many reasonable people voted leave for entirely non-racist reasons. Now if they still want to leave then I grant you that they’re almost certainly racist, but that’s not how things looked two years ago. Back then they were going to get a unicorn!

So no matter what your reason for voting to leave, if we haven’t convinced you by now that you were wrong, you are almost certainly a racist.

 

[Foxholer]

So, I write a post that is very clear and either only you don’t seem to understand it or you deliberately put your own spin on it. You condemn it in insulting terms as “a load of conspiratorial theory twaddle!” Before agreeing with it in your very next post in reply to SR.
You say I am “suggesting” that May “sabotaged” the negotiations when I said or even suggested nothing of the sort. When I asked you to show me where I used the word “sabotage” you couldn’t. In my next post I clearly reiterated, just in case you were still in any doubt, that I did not say or suggest that May sabotaged the negotiations.
Now you want me to clarify my post again and you want ME to apologise!

What planet are you on?

There's no point continuing this 'conversation'!

I stick to my description of your initial post!

 

[Hobbit]

Highlighted bit - been happening for years in NATO exercises or conflicts etc - Many Nations Under Joint Operations.

And been told by people in various high roles in defence both civil servants and Military- the UK Armed Forces will always be under overall control by the UK government - many laws that keep it that way regardless what the EU security blah blah may say

You said it would never happen. You were proven wrong, including a link to the EU's own website. You come back with blah, blah, blah. Try not to be too childish Phil. You were proven wrong, be man enough to admit it.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

You said it would never happen. You were proven wrong, including a link to the EU's own website. You come back with blah, blah, blah. Try not to be too childish Phil. You were proven wrong, be man enough to admit it.

Proven wrong ? I’m confused but i must have missed the time when the UK Armed Forces no longer exists and it’s now an EU Army ? Can you let me know when that happened ?

 

[harpo_72]

I am not so sure about that. Here is a breathtaking tweet that I think was supposed to defend leavers against the racist accusation but in the end goes a bit wrong and the remoaner just can’t help himself:

I disagree. Many reasonable people voted leave for entirely non-racist reasons. Now if they still want to leave then I grant you that they’re almost certainly racist, but that’s not how things looked two years ago. Back then they were going to get a unicorn!

So no matter what your reason for voting to leave, if we haven’t convinced you by now that you were wrong, you are almost certainly a racist.

I think we have constant quotes about the 17million who voted leave. What we fail to mention is some of those reasons were not about leaving but protest votes.
Then 2.5 years down the line we have a new generation of voters who want their say and the quotes and forgive me if these are wrong are that 70% are in favour of remain. Additionally there is the loss of voters due to natural causes or setting up elsewhere.
So the point of a second referendum is justified.
I don’t think the current leavers are all racist, there is a large faction which are, it cannot be denied. However there is a proportion who think they are correct, and they need to pull together a persuasive argument.
Although experience is those ardent leavers use business cases, but they don’t seem to be current.

 

[Hacker Khan]

Remain would be my absolute last choice. I believe it would be disasterous to go against the referendum result now. The damage it would do to the reputation of our parliament, our democracy, confidence in our political system and elected representatives would be catastrophic. No one would ever vote again. Apathy would reign and so soon after the Scottish independence vote that received such a huge turnout. The extremist parties would enjoy a real surge. People would feel powerless and disengaged from their own nation.
I don’t like May’s deal for the same reasons as you. I don’t fear no deal and I export to the EU on a daily basis. I would prefer that we can do a deal that works for all and I don’t want to see the EU fail.
I think if the EU had remained a trading bloc all would have been well. I just don’t believe a trading deal is worth having so much interference in the running of our own affairs by others. I think the whole EU project has been disingenuous from the start and has far outreached anything like we voted to join. I don’t trust it and I think it is this lack of trust is really what is behind so many voting to leave. I don’t believe it is democratic enough and as you can probably tell I am a democrat first and foremost.

And leave with a no deal would be the absolute last choice of many others, including a majority of parliament. Statements like 'no one would ever vote again' are the leavers equivalent of some remainers very worst case project fear statements. The alternatives are do a deal, come out with no deal or a second referendum. No one is saying anyone should just ignore the referendum and forget it ever happened. And if people see a second referendum as 'ignoring the result' then fair enough, that's their prerogative. But there are many others that if faced with the choice of coming out with no deal or having a second referendum once we know the alternatives would prefer a second referendum.

And if there is a second referendum then that may well lead to some increased interest in extremist parties. But I would argue that that genie is already out of the bottle in many western societies, and there are many other political, social and economic factors that need addressing to stop the rise of extremist politics and a second vote would only play a relatively small part in that.

 

[Hobbit]

Proven wrong ? I’m confused but i must have missed the time when the UK Armed Forces no longer exists and it’s now an EU Army ? Can you let me know when that happened ?

You're dodging it Phil, and very poorly at that. Who said anything about the UK armed forces no longer existing? You did. You're shifting the goal posts to try and get out from under your statement that UK forces would never be commanded by the EU, which has very clearly proven to be untrue.

Maybe something you can relate to. Who is the overall commander of the EUFOR? Who was the overall commander of that mission when it first went into Bosnia? How many different commanders have there been, and from how many different countries?

As you can see from below, Major-General Leakey was overall commander for 2 years. UK armed forces have been commanded for a further 13 years by commanders from other countries.

No. Nation Rank Name Period 1

United KingdomMajor GeneralDavid Leakey02.12.2004 – 06.12.2005 2

ItalyMajor GeneralGian Marco Chiarini06.12.2005 – 05.12.2006 3

GermanyRear AdmiralHans-Jochen Witthauer05.12.2006 – 04.12.2007 4

SpainMajor GeneralIgnacio Martín Villalaín[6]04.12.2007 – 04.12.2008 5

ItalyMajor GeneralStefano Castagnotto04.12.2008 – 03.12.2009 6

AustriaMajor GeneralBernhard Bair04.12.2009 – 06.12.2011 7

AustriaMajor GeneralRobert Brieger06.12.2011 – 03.12.2012 8

AustriaMajor GeneralDieter Heidecker03.12.2012 – 17.12.2014 9

AustriaMajor GeneralJohann Luif17.12.2014 – 24.03.2016 10

AustriaMajor GeneralFriedrich Schrötter24.03.2016 – 28.03.2017 11

AustriaMajor GeneralAnton Waldner28.03.2017 – 28.03.2018 12

AustriaMajor GeneralMartin Dorfer28.03.2018 – present

Why can't you, when presented with irrefutable evidence from the EU's own website referencing EU regs, admit you're wrong?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

You're dodging it Phil, and very poorly at that. Who said anything about the UK armed forces no longer existing? You did. You're shifting the goal posts to try and get out from under your statement that UK forces would never be commanded by the EU, which has very clearly proven to be untrue.

Maybe something you can relate to. Who is the overall commander of the EUFOR? Who was the overall commander of that mission when it first went into Bosnia? How many different commanders have there been, and from how many different countries?

As you can see from below, Major-General Leakey was overall commander for 2 years. UK armed forces have been commanded for a further 13 years by commanders from other countries.

No. Nation Rank Name Period 1

United KingdomMajor GeneralDavid Leakey02.12.2004 – 06.12.2005 2

ItalyMajor GeneralGian Marco Chiarini06.12.2005 – 05.12.2006 3

GermanyRear AdmiralHans-Jochen Witthauer05.12.2006 – 04.12.2007 4

SpainMajor GeneralIgnacio Martín Villalaín[6]04.12.2007 – 04.12.2008 5

ItalyMajor GeneralStefano Castagnotto04.12.2008 – 03.12.2009 6

AustriaMajor GeneralBernhard Bair04.12.2009 – 06.12.2011 7

AustriaMajor GeneralRobert Brieger06.12.2011 – 03.12.2012 8

AustriaMajor GeneralDieter Heidecker03.12.2012 – 17.12.2014 9

AustriaMajor GeneralJohann Luif17.12.2014 – 24.03.2016 10

AustriaMajor GeneralFriedrich Schrötter24.03.2016 – 28.03.2017 11

AustriaMajor GeneralAnton Waldner28.03.2017 – 28.03.2018 12

AustriaMajor GeneralMartin Dorfer28.03.2018 – present

Why can't you, when presented with irrefutable evidence from the EU's own website referencing EU regs, admit you're wrong?

The EU don’t have control over the UK armed Forces and never would - it’s just words , it’s never going to happen - lots and lots of hurdles and laws in the way. It’s just never going to happen. There can be exercises etc etc but our Armed Forces will be under the control of our government.

I’m not exactly sure what it is you think I have said but I have highlighted above for you

The European Union don’t have control of the UK Forces , UK can be “asked” to supply troops for exercises or operations or conflicts etc and a lot of those times they will be under the command of various commanders within the Operation - American etc etc etc

BUT the UK Government have overall control of our own Armed Forces - I have heard plenty of scaremongering about EU army and the EU having control over our forces etc etc

 

[Hobbit]

I’m not exactly sure what it is you think I have said but I have highlighted above for you

The European Union don’t have control of the UK Forces , UK can be “asked” to supply troops for exercises or operations or conflicts etc and a lot of those times they will be under the command of various commanders within the Operation - American etc etc etc

BUT the UK Government have overall control of our own Armed Forces - I have heard plenty of scaremongering about EU army and the EU having control over our forces etc etc

I'm not disputing the UK govt control. The govt says yes they can go but, as you saw from who commands EUFOR and under current EU regs if the mission is extended or the focus changes the EU defence commissioner doesn't have to refer back to the member states to change the remit. Ergo they are commanded by the EU. Its as simple as that.

If you can be bothered to read the info it clearly states what the command structure is. And the change to the remit on the deployment to the Democratic Republic of Congo clearly shows the use of that control.

The decision in the Congo was the right operational decision. It was a necessary reactionary decision made based on what was changing in front of them. But in terms of the wider debate about an EU army and who controls it you're wrong, its already happening/happened. That aside, I agree with an EU army for the defence of the EU WITHIN its own borders, and I don't care who controls it for those operations. No problem with that at all but I fundamentally disagree with EU forces operating outside the EU... think about it in the context of what has gone on in recent years. British troops in Iraq/Afghanistan has led to terror attacks in the UK. When does someone from the Congo set off a bomb in Brussels/London?

 

[SocketRocket]

I think we have constant quotes about the 17million who voted leave. What we fail to mention is some of those reasons were not about leaving but protest votes.
Then 2.5 years down the line we have a new generation of voters who want their say and the quotes and forgive me if these are wrong are that 70% are in favour of remain. Additionally there is the loss of voters due to natural causes or setting up elsewhere.
So the point of a second referendum is justified.
I don’t think the current leavers are all racist, there is a large faction which are, it cannot be denied. However there is a proportion who think they are correct, and they need to pull together a persuasive argument.
Although experience is those ardent leavers use business cases, but they don’t seem to be current.

There may be a large number of Remainers who are Racists, Who Knows? There may be a number of middle aged Remainers who are now Older and are now Leavers, Who Knows? 17.4 Million did infact vote Leave, it does not matter a hoot why they decided to, they just did. Supposition on whether people may have different voting intentions is also an irrelevance, that's just not the way democracy works, how chaotic would it be if this type of reasoning was used every time there was a vote on something. Let your Yin and Yang become harmonious I say, face the morning sun and feel the rain on your skin.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Seems it isn't only the Leavers that don't understand;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_an...-gets-death-threats-over-anti-brexit-receipts

Before the deflections start, Brexit wasn't about stopping immigration, it was about controlling it; allowing in people who want to contribute to and become part of the community, not just take from it.

 

[bobmac]

EBay sellers who place an advert/photo for a 'smart plug' at £1.99, only to find the smart plugs are £12.99 and £1.99 is for a travel adapter or a 3 month warranty .

eg
https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_...lug&rt=nc&LH_PrefLoc=1&_trksid=p2045573.m1684