Brexit and the Consequences

[Atilla]

Handing over our defense forces. Doesn't sound like taking back control to me.

Where and when are we handing our defenses and to whom?

Care to clarify?

 

[counter_violent]

I don't understand cv on this point. I don't see any other member state wanting to leave at the moment. That is not to say that it won't happen, but neither he nor anyone else can foresee when.

It's not about leaving, it's about other countries not being happy with the EU and it's policies, hence the rise of populist parties. It is very clear that an increasing number of voters within member countries do not believe in the EU's direction of travel.

Can't make my mind up if you lot are Ostriches or king Canute's

 

[counter_violent]

Where and when are we handing our defenses and to whom?

Care to clarify?

Signalcalc has been through all of this previously.

 

[counter_violent]

At last, Corbyn gets something right.

Today JC called Mays outline trade proposal "26 pages of waffle"

That's exactly what it is. A make believe document which has zero guarantees that the EU needs to negotiate anything in good faith.

An utterly meaningless and pointless piece of work.

 

[counter_violent]

I think 1 in 4 may be about right.

Considering there are only 36% of Brexiteers in the UK who voted to leave, I'd hazard a guess half of those are numpties who were duped by slimy politicians and another quarter perhaps who don't quite know where Moroco is.

That would leave 9% who genuinely want Brexit and think it'll be great.

Now I know numbers are not your strong point.

100% of Brexiteers who voted to leave, voted to leave. You can trust me on this, otherwise remoan would have won.

 

[Splitlink]

It's not about leaving, it's about other countries not being happy with the EU and it's policies, hence the rise of populist parties. It is very clear that an increasing number of voters within member countries do not believe in the EU's direction of travel.

Can't make my mind up if you lot are Ostriches or king Canute's

Oh! Not happy with EU policies. It seems that you are going through something similar. That is not leaving or breaking up, it's about wanting change. Something very different and something that the the EU was hoping that the UK would help with forty years ago. Such was not to be, unfortunately.

EU should have listened to Charles de Gaulle at the time.

 

[Splitlink]

Now I know numbers are not your strong point.

100% of Brexiteers who voted to leave, voted to leave. You can trust me on this, otherwise remoan would have won.

Well, that makes sense! I suppose 100% of 100% who voted to leave did vote to leave.

I still say that 52%-48% is not enough. Now that we have this furor, the division shows very clearly.

 

[Pat494]

Well, that makes sense! I suppose 100% of 100% who voted to leave did vote to leave.

I still say that 52%-48% is not enough. Now that we have this furor, the division shows very clearly.

Cameron was really stupid not to insist that there must be at least 10% majority to effect any change. As it is the small % difference has caused major upheavals.

 

[sminicooper]

Cameron was really stupid not to insist that there must be at least 10% majority to effect any change. As it is the small % difference has caused major upheavals.

The Remainers would have found a way to keep us in whatever. They're succeeding so far aren't they.

 

[tomorton]

Can't say I'm particularly concerned whether we Leave or Remain, too many unknowns in the equation.

But the damage to politics of this whole episode could last a generation. Could certainly result in shifts to extreme right and extreme left, heightened national independence movements, increased pressure to restrict the second chamber, regional agitation, constraints on referendums and their design, possibly more frequent referendums. Some reactions might be positive but there's a risk of much loss of democracy.

None of what's going on is going to be seen as encouraging inward foreign investment.

 

[cantagril]

Can't say I'm particularly concerned whether we Leave or Remain, too many unknowns in the equation.

But the damage to politics of this whole episode could last a generation.......

..................

None of what's going on is going to be seen as encouraging inward foreign investment.

By one measure, one could argue that so comprehensively making a dog's breakfast out of a sow's ear is an impressive achievement.

 

[Splitlink]

The Remainers would have found a way to keep us in whatever. They're succeeding so far aren't they.

No, they are not, so far. But they are doing the best they can. It's natural, isn't it? Otherwise they would not be Remainers.

More than anything, because of the length of time that I have been over here, I like to consider myself a European and I hate the idea of UK not being a part.

 

[counter_violent]

No, they are not, so far. But they are doing the best they can. It's natural, isn't it? Otherwise they would not be Remainers.

More than anything, because of the length of time that I have been over here, I like to consider myself a European and I hate the idea of UK not being a part.

Then become a populist and challenge the misguided EU policy makers. We are not leaving just to disrupt, we are leaving because we don't like the direction of travel.
UK has never been onboard with the EU.

 

[cantagril]

UK has never been onboard with the EU.

Fair point. I recall that in the days of the Iron Lady we managed to threaten, blackmail, cajole and embarass the then EC into improved conditions for the UK
- a process also known as "negotiation".

As we have no-one with the stomach to fight our corner - or the strength to wield a handbag - then the current choice of cut and run makes perfect sense.

I'm curious as to just who we're going to be cosying up to after the decree nisi is pronounced. The so-called "special" relationship with the US breathed its last a few years ago when no longer expedient for the Yanks and other potential suitors seem (to me ) to be somewhat unattractive as well as even more distant....



Any thoughts on likely candidates?

 

[sminicooper]

No, they are not, so far. But they are doing the best they can. It's natural, isn't it? Otherwise they would not be Remainers.

More than anything, because of the length of time that I have been over here, I like to consider myself a European and I hate the idea of UK not being a part.

I wish I could agree with you but:

"Most of its provisions ["Backstop"] do not come into force until the end of the transition period. However, at that point and in the absence of an agreement between the UK and the EU to the contrary, the whole Protocol will come into force and will require the whole of the UK to stay in a Customs Union with the EU – a Customs Union in which the UK has no vote on the tariffs to be charged, or on with whom to do or not do trade deals, but will be obliged to follow the EU’s tariffs at all times. Further, it obliges the UK not to deviate from EU rules on a wide range of so-called “level playing field” areas of policy, including environment, workplace rights, state aids and competition law."

Added to the fact that we can't get out of it without the EU's permission and we wouldn't be able to fix any independent trade deals, that rather sounds like staying in to me.

 

[counter_violent]

Fair point. I recall that in the days of the Iron Lady we managed to threaten, blackmail, cajole and embarass the then EC into improved conditions for the UK
- a process also known as "negotiation".

As we have no-one with the stomach to fight our corner - or the strength to wield a handbag - then the current choice of cut and run makes perfect sense.

I'm curious as to just who we're going to be cosying up to after the decree nisi is pronounced. The so-called "special" relationship with the US breathed its last a few years ago when no longer expedient for the Yanks and other potential suitors seem (to me ) to be somewhat unattractive as well as even more distant....



Any thoughts on likely candidates?

Well, who really knows. There have been mutterings that the commonwealth are interested, the TPP. Combine that with a general shift on WTO terms. The one we need to avoid is a formal deal with the US. We do enough natural trade with them without formalising the arrangement. I expect it would be too onerous. The yank just love to sue everyone at the drop of a hat. Bi lateral type deals are the way to go and there's nothing to be scared of. The UK is lacking leadership, political will and ambition. This has to change.

 

[Signalcalc]

I'm curious as to just who we're going to be cosying up to after the decree nisi is pronounced. The so-called "special" relationship with the US breathed its last a few years ago when no longer expedient for the Yanks and other potential suitors seem (to me ) to be somewhat unattractive as well as even more distant....

Any thoughts on likely candidates?

Good question, let me explain......:cheesy:

The special relationship is mostly as a result of the war/post-war period when the UK/US created an intelligence sharing community and was also joined by AUS/CAN/NZ a few years later to form the 5-yes intelligence sharing community.

The intelligence was initially based on electronic communications gathering and aerial/satellite recon during the cold war period but then expanded in scope to encompass spying on it's own citizens via all electronic/cyber means, humint has always been an information source throughout history. Snowdon et-al exposed the modern, citizen spying networks a few years ago and there have been further major revelations since, despite all denials by various governments that these things were being used to spy on their own citizens since the exposure of Echelon from the late 80's.

There has never been a breakdown in that 'special' relationship, in fact it has gathered in strength over the last 20 years or so, so no cosying up to anyone else is needed. The EU, being a Western construct, would like to be more integrated into the 5-eyes community, there are security concerns over many of the EU member states, so it is highly unlikely to happen on a wider scale, but it happens to varying degrees.

With the EU military fusion, it is highly likely that there is now a much higher degree of sharing with Germany, France and whomever else in the EU community than ever before, this is a major reason why TM, being the longest serving home office minister was made PM during the Brexit period and why she called a general election when she didn't really need to, to buy time to try and safeguard these new intelligence sharing agreements and is why she has played the remain card very well, leading into a chaotic (on the surface at least) non-negotiation, negotiation.

There is nothing more important to any government than it's intelligence gathering resources and capabilities, that and the military to be able to act on information received, it is THE highest priority in Brexit.

I've said it before, everything else is fluff and bluff when it comes to Brexit, information gathering is the key priority, but of course none of that rationale can be exposed to the public, which is why you even see leave means leave leaders avoiding awkward questions about military policy when asked in their roadshows, they know the game and don't want to talk about it as they see it as a high risk to their own arguments for leaving, and frankly, talking publicly about intelligence sharing matters is a no-no for any political leader, put one foot wrong and you are in trouble with the Deep State, and no-one wants that keeping them awake at night.

 

[cantagril]

Good question, let me explain......:cheesy:

The special relationship is mostly as a result of the war/post-war period when the UK/US created an intelligence sharing community and was also joined by AUS/CAN/NZ a few years later to form the 5-yes intelligence sharing community.

The intelligence was initially based on electronic communications gathering and aerial/satellite recon during the cold war period but then expanded in scope to encompass spying on it's own citizens via all electronic/cyber means, humint has always been an information source throughout history. Snowdon et-al exposed the modern, citizen spying networks a few years ago and there have been further major revelations since, despite all denials by various governments that these things were being used to spy on their own citizens since the exposure of Echelon from the late 80's.

There has never been a breakdown in that 'special' relationship, in fact it has gathered in strength over the last 20 years or so, so no cosying up to anyone else is needed. The EU, being a Western construct, would like to be more integrated into the 5-eyes community, there are security concerns over many of the EU member states, so it is highly unlikely to happen on a wider scale, but it happens to varying degrees.

With the EU military fusion, it is highly likely that there is now a much higher degree of sharing with Germany, France and whomever else in the EU community than ever before, this is a major reason why TM, being the longest serving home office minister was made PM during the Brexit period and why she called a general election when she didn't really need to, to buy time to try and safeguard these new intelligence sharing agreements and is why she has played the remain card very well, leading into a chaotic (on the surface at least) non-negotiation, negotiation.

There is nothing more important to any government than it's intelligence gathering resources and capabilities, that and the military to be able to act on information received, it is THE highest priority in Brexit.

I've said it before, everything else is fluff and bluff when it comes to Brexit, information gathering is the key priority, but of course none of that rationale can be exposed to the public, which is why you even see leave means leave leaders avoiding awkward questions about military policy when asked in their roadshows, they know the game and don't want to talk about it as they see it as a high risk to their own arguments for leaving, and frankly, talking publicly about intelligence sharing matters is a no-no for any political leader, put one foot wrong and you are in trouble with the Deep State, and no-one wants that keeping them awake at night.

It is all clear to me now I wonder if the majority of leavers understood that the relationship was based on what you have kindly taken do much trouble elucidate. And there was me thinking that trade had something to with it....as it seems not to then any distancing of the US is irrelevant, right?

 

[Signalcalc]

It is all clear to me now I wonder if the majority of leavers understood that the relationship was based on what you have kindly taken do much trouble elucidate. And there was me thinking that trade had something to with it....as it seems not to then any distancing of the US is irrelevant, right?

Yep, distancing of the US is MSM veneer, ask why there are troop movements across Europe from West to East and ongoing exercises along the EU's Eastern borders, all part of NATO, does this look like the US distancing itself from the NATO arrangement, or does it look like re-assurance and strengthening the bond between the NATO member nations? The anti-Russian rhetoric is the perfect excuse to maintain public support for NATO and then EU military. What are the Russians actually doing? Nothing (apart from invading Crimea and a few other minor infractions in Europe in the grand scale of things).

The military fusion with the EU has been quietly ongoing for 2 decades, no-one has raised an eyebrow, until Brexit. The panic within the Deep State about the prior agreed arrangements has led to an accelerated pace in getting it all in place, it's all about geo-political power as much as it is about defending borders and keeping an eye on it citizens, knowledge is power, knowledge gives strength to the arm.

Both remainers and leavers have been ignorant all along, and this has been deliberate, the focus on worthy subjects such as immigration, trade, sovereignty etc is valid, but it belies the reasons why we are seeing TM still in power, ask how any prime minister could withstand the apparent pressure to stand down, in history there has never been such a scenario where a PM could survive, and survive she will until parliament takes it's course, rejects the deal and something else in the powerplay comes into action......

 

[cantagril]

Yep, distancing of the US is MSM veneer, ask why there are troop movements across Europe from West to East and ongoing exercises along the EU's Eastern borders, all part of NATO, does this look like the US distancing itself from the NATO arrangement, or does it look like re-assurance and strengthening the bond between the NATO member nations? The anti-Russian rhetoric is the perfect excuse to maintain public support for NATO and then EU military. What are the Russians actually doing? Nothing.

The military fusion with the EU has been quietly ongoing for 2 decades, no-one has raised an eyebrow, until Brexit. The panic within the Deep State about the prior agreed arrangements has led to an accelerated pace in getting it all in place, it's all about geo-political power as much as it is about defending borders and keeping an eye on it citizens, knowledge is power, knowledge gives strength to the arm.

Both remainers and leavers have been ignorant all along, and this has been deliberate, the focus on worthy subjects such as immigration, trade, sovereignty etc is valid, but it belies the reasons why we are seeing TM still in power, ask how any prime minister could withstand the apparent pressure to stand down, in history there has never been such a scenario where a PM could survive, and survive she will until parliament takes it's course, rejects the deal and something else in the powerplay comes into action......

Interesting. So, the flattening off of our exports to the US since 2013 (including the trough a couple of years back) and the continuing healthy rise of imports from them are merely temporary phenomena?

I have to admit that I had completely misunderstood what people had been saying about making our own trade arrangements and looking to the US to replace any losses with the EU due to Brexit. I'm sure that if they'd known then what you've explained that there would have been far fewer objections to the duff trade arrangements that seem to be on the cards.