Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I saw the first line in the Oxford English dictionary re Nationalism and my immediate thought was how does that relate to India, USA, Australia, New Zealand, Malta, South Africa, Canada and so on.
 
Perhaps we could agree that patriotism and nationalism are probably flip sides of a very subjective 'coin' - defined only by how an individual sees themselves.

IMO it is not relevant to the Brexit debate.

In my view the issue is more about an undignified debate between the UK and the EU that is being played out between individuals more concerned with showboating in the media and juvenile writings on Twitter. Negotiations would normally take place largely in confidence. Now both sides are afraid of a loss of face in the media whose sole interest is only in creating sensational stories for a few seconds or headlines. The propoganda has caused the debate to become an unedifying show of bickering (much like some of the deliberately provocative language on here).

I'm interested in seeing more information on how we think the EU elections might cloud our thinking. We have Juncker,Tusk etc finishingtheir term probably being replaced by others from a small economy countries (because the EU is afraid to be seen as bullying small members). Such people seem to me to have little knowledge of international economics or global affairs. This is a risk to the EU and, by implication the UK if we Remain tried to tightly. The EU has massive issues because Juncker insisted on 'printing' money to keep the Euro afloat, this huge debt means the risk from Italy, Spain, France and Greece and fragile Germany will need further refinancing.

The UK would be dragged down so there is a lot more at stake than the Irish border; making it especially important that we can trade beyond the EU and halt the 'backstop' at a time of our choosing.

I think this is spot on , on a slightly different point , if we do extend the Brexit time line , do we still put up candidates in the EU elections that i think take place in March ?
 
I’m talking about MY experiences in Seaham, at no time have I said it is the same countrywide or I am correct, purely commenting on what I’ve seen, heard and discussed.
Paul, am not talking sides and I believe i understood the sentiment of your original post that mentioned racist reasons. I would highlight the phrase "a lot of people", a lot is a subjective term and in the context of multi millions of people there is a large scope for different interpretation. This may explain your post being interpreted not how you intended.
Cheers.
 
I took the queen’s shilling and did as I was told, I didn’t get a choice which banner in Bosnia or Kosovo I was working under, the commander in chiefs were multi national.
It tends to be civilians that issues with EU/NATO etc.

As for Seaham, as I said before the discussions experienced have been numerous and widespread over the last 3 years, the Rugby tale was just the latest experience.
We now have 4 foodbanks, was 1, other 3 have come about in the last 12 months.
We have very very few asians or africans in the area, we need to sort our own scum out before we blame everything on immigration.
Did every person you refer to as scum vote leave?
If a white person in Seaham called a foreigner scum, would they be a racist?
Do you only refer to our own people as scum? If so, is that not racist?
 
Did every person you refer to as scum vote leave?
If a white person in Seaham called a foreigner scum, would they be a racist?
Do you only refer to our own people as scum? If so, is that not racist?
Were did I associate “our scum” with colour and every race will have scum of some sort, not really sure what you’re getting at.
 
I hope all the Leavers who have been baying for Mark Carneys head are suddenly very happy with him as he has painted a potential ‘golden age’ of Britain
 
Most of this stuff is just waffle and filling a void of 'news' based on fact.

We can all recognise that Brussels will be pushing things to the last moment because that has always been the EU tactics with any member's issue. It is the standard strategy of a 'committee' which seeks to avoid making a decision that might prove wrong.

They have continually pushed back the UK / PM because they (organisationally and structurally) are not equipped to really negotiate.

In this instance, I'm with the PM: we must hold our nerve and let it go to the wire - loose our nerve and we'll be royally screwed. It is not right and is causing a lot of problems that, unfortunately, will have lasting consequences for many people in UK AND in EU. The pity and truth is that citizens' well being is too far down the list of priorities for Brussels to worry about

The EU was never going to negotiate in 'good faith' there are too many voices (same as in HoC) that maintaining the status quo is their lowest risk option.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top