Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:27 pm

Sadly kids football intervenes so I'll have to leave you worrying about being invaded by this EU Army.

Have a drink, and stop worrying about an army that if it existed, would be on your side.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:28 pm

android wrote:What has your link got to do with my point? Maybe you posted the wrong link but the one I opened was a story back in July and I am talking about the BBC's coverage of Davidson's resignation at the end of August. Something rather important happened in between - you know the proroguing, the coup, the end of democracy and Davidson's resignation shortly afterwards causing much excitement in anti Johnson and anti Brexit camps.

Like Lancaster you are completely missing the point. The BBC trailed her resignation the night before with the personal/politics reasons no doubt expecting her to trash Johnson over Brexit. But it didn't happen. I will give it one more go to get the relevant facts across. The BBC completely failed to report the fact that in her press conference Davidson went to some length to make it clear that she not only supported Johnson but (here it is...) SHE CONTINUES TO BELIEVE HE WANTS A BREXIT DEAL AND SHE URGED MPS TO SUPPORT IT. These rather important facts in CAPITALS were not mentioned AT ALL.

I could tell you why the BBC did this but...oh what's the point... I suspect you will still not accept the simple facts!

No, if you've got facts, then by all means, post

If its your opinion as facts, then don't bother.

android · Post by **android** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:30 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:The entire first two paragraphs are about her resignation.

Don't go full Ringo Android, its a horrible place to end up in!

I just went on the BBC website, and searched for "Ruth Davidson" btw

Not your best effort Lancaster. See post 12400 for why. 12400 this is mad.

android · Post by **android** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:31 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No, if you've got facts, then by all means, post

If its your opinion as facts, then don't bother.

Oh dear that's much worse!

android · Post by **android** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:32 pm

I thought the capital letters would help. That is just a fact of what she said Lancs. I give up!

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:32 pm

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:Brexit aside, who the hell do you vote for at the next election. I can’t stand the tories but the thought of having Corbyn and Abbot in government fills me with dread!

None of them quite simply.

They've shown as a group that they can't agree on anything, they can't get anything done and they appear to like proverbially running around in circles flapping their arms around.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:35 pm

: 8A601E20-0851-496B-9BEF-30215F5AC4BF.png (438.73 KiB) Viewed 2670 times

This is not an EU army.

Well I never.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:36 pm

android wrote:Oh dear that's much worse!

I didn't mean to come across as arsey, but if you have facts, then post them.

If its another "I haven't seen it on the BBC website so it doesn't exist" then you (and I) are wasting our time.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:37 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:
8A601E20-0851-496B-9BEF-30215F5AC4BF.png
This is not an EU army.

Well I never.

Look at the bottom

Whose army is it?

mkmel · Post by **mkmel** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:40 pm

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:If Labour found a decent leader and sidekick then they’d stand a chance, as it is I just can’t see them being elected!

Stand a chance?

They would walk it!!!!!!!

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:40 pm

The permanent structured co-operation (army) will help member states to jointly develop defence capabilities and make them available for EU military operations.

What about that sentence is confusing.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:42 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Look at the bottom

Whose army is it?

NATO will disappear

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:
8A601E20-0851-496B-9BEF-30215F5AC4BF.png
This is not an EU army.

Well I never.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/h ... st-defence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You'd probably be better off reading this.

Potentially this could lay the foundations for an EU army, but I couldn't even begin to imagine the command structure for it.

The EDA is also there to help the EU countries work together on varying projects, standardized training etc.

https://www.eda.europa.eu/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:49 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:NATO will disappear

Is NATO an army?

Taffy on the wing · Post by **Taffy on the wing** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:49 pm

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:Brexit aside, who the hell do you vote for at the next election. I can’t stand the tories but the thought of having Corbyn and Abbot in government fills me with dread!

Why?.....What is wrong with Corbyn exactly?

PaintYorkClaretnBlue · Post by **PaintYorkClaretnBlue** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:53 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:After today it's pretty clear that Corbyn's a far superior leader than Johnson who can't lead a ****-up in the proverbial brewery.

Abbott might be cringeworthy at times, but she keeps getting elected so she's obviously more competent than her public image suggests, and having her in government is much better than having Dominic Cummings in it. Johnson's a joke, and so is his shambles of a government.

I’m not claiming that Johnson is a great leader, I just don’t trust Corbyn and his merry band to lead this country.

In relation to Abbot, I’m sure that she’s a decent mp for her constituents in so much that they will continue to vote for her. I’m not so sure that she is actually doing right by them in that she refuses to condemn the young black lads who are killing other young black lads.
I don’t think that her getting re-elected year on year actually demonstrates her ability to be a potential cabinet minister in the next government.

Whilst I’m on about knife crime I follow a lady on twitter @Dwaynamics who is actually going out with the police in her local area and seeing the issues through the eyes of the police. Give her a follow, in my opinion she’s doing more good for the relationship between the police and the local black youth than Abbot will do in a lifetime.

Taffy on the wing · Post by **Taffy on the wing** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:55 pm

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:If Labour found a decent leader and sidekick then they’d stand a chance, as it is I just can’t see them being elected!

Have you ever actually listened to Corbyn?
Or do you get your info from the headlines in Newspapers and on TV?......serious question.

Stalbansclaret · Post by **Stalbansclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:58 pm

dsr wrote:Nothing. It will be business as usual. The forms that businesses fill in on exports may be different from day 1, or there may be a transition period; but there won't be border posts springing up overnight.

They'd need a lot of border posts, mind. I drove from Athlone to Belfast a few weeks back, and just south of Clones you cross the border four times in ten miles. I somehow doubt they will ever put a border post at each one!

Thanks for responding dsr but if nothing will happen what's all the fuss re the backstop about ? My understanding is that No Deal means no transition period and obviously no backstop. What's for sure is that there will be no tolerance in Ireland, particularly from the Catholic majority, for erection of a hard border. I find it incredible that any sensible politician would be driving hard toward No Deal and Boris Johnson's new "hard man of the people" stance is ludicrous posturing given his lack of any coherent explanation of what the impact of No Deal would be.

Stalbansclaret · Post by **Stalbansclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:03 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:The permanent structured co-operation (army) will help member states to jointly develop defence capabilities and make them available for EU military operations.

What about that sentence is confusing.

I have permanent structured cooperation with the occupants of the other 5 flats in my block around the recycling but it doesn't mean we are one family.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:07 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:They weren't "my claims" they were low banks!

I just happen to agree with his opinion.

I am allowed to do that you know!

Questions 2 and 3 related to your claims.

As for Lowbank's claims, you can agree with them if you want but it does make you look a bit gullible.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:08 pm

Tall Paul wrote:I'm not sure why anyone would need to go to such lengths to discredit you, Ringo.

You do a great job of that on your own.

Totally agree.

I'm more than capable.

For some reason it still doesn't seem to stop some no mark, spending their time on being a caricature of someone else . But doing it badly.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:09 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:https://youtu.be/2-u0KjLdYa8

"Over the medium to long term the UK economy will do well"

Chief economist at Deutsch bank. At 56 seconds on the video clip above.

I think any fair minded person would agree that him saying, in the context of a no deal brexit conversation with the presenter. That a no deal brexit could be positive.

But then again I did say fair minded.....

I don't think that's him saying that a No Deal would be positive, just that it's not going to impact too negatively given the strength of the economy.

However, it's open to interpretation so I was wrong to say you made it up. Apologies.

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:09 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Is NATO an army?

Yes, and the EU Army is going to invade Natoland, steal their jobs and impregnate their fair maidens.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:12 pm

aggi wrote:Questions 2 and 3 related to your claims.

As for Lowbank's claims, you can agree with them if you want but it does make you look a bit gullible.

Or it makes you look like you don’t know what’s going to happen over the next 5 years.

Or you just don’t want to accept what’s happening.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:13 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I have provided the link to the 25 member states coming together on security, word it how you like it’s an EU army.

It's really not. We've (the board) had this discussion way back when. When you read the detail it's clearly not an EU army (and even if it was there is no way the if the UK remained in the EU it could be forced to be a part of it).

As for your other points:

Member will be forced to join the Euro.

Fiscal policy will be centralised and taxes set from Brussels not Westminster.

When the campaign starts and people find what going to happen if we stay in you may find more and more people realising we are best off out

Why not just be honest and say you read something on the internet that said these things will be happen. We all know there's no chance of the UK being forced to join the Euro if it stayed in the EU and the same regarding fiscal policy.

Maybe provide some facts for them.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:14 pm

android wrote:Not your best effort Lancaster. See post 12400 for why. 12400 this is mad.

Never ever lose sight of the fact that in lancasterclaret, you have someone who famously declared,

"I do have the unfortunate habit of being right most of the time"

Bare this in mind when exchanging views, It may be helpful.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:15 pm

This sounds entertaining (from Private Eye):

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:18 pm

The EU is not a static organisation.

Never has been.

It’s always been about expansion and increased control over its members.

Just read it’s history.

You guys just seem to blindly believe it’s all good.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:21 pm

aggi wrote:It's really not. We've (the board) had this discussion way back when. When you read the detail it's clearly not an EU army (and even if it was there is no way the if the UK remained in the EU it could be forced to be a part of it).

As for your other points:

Member will be forced to join the Euro.

Fiscal policy will be centralised and taxes set from Brussels not Westminster.

When the campaign starts and people find what going to happen if we stay in you may find more and more people realising we are best off out

Why not just be honest and say you read something on the internet that said these things will be happen. We all know there's no chance of the UK being forced to join the Euro if it stayed in the EU and the same regarding fiscal policy.

So it will be available for EU military operations, but it’s not an army. Ok then

Maybe provide some facts for them.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:22 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Is NATO an army?

: E494D7A0-A2CF-495C-B716-CC51B13043A3.png (1.17 MiB) Viewed 2582 times

No just a bunch of guys going fly fishing

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:23 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:The permanent structured co-operation (army) will help member states to jointly develop defence capabilities and make them available for EU military operations.

What about that sentence is confusing.

It’s not an EU army, but if it was what is your issue with it? Do we want to depend on the seriously unstable Donald Trump to help us out?

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:28 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Never ever lose sight of the fact that in lancasterclaret, you have someone who famously declared,

"I do have the unfortunate habit of being right most of the time"

Bare this in mind when exchanging views, I may be helpful.

The James O'Brien of Up the clarets.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:29 pm

aggi wrote:I don't think that's him saying that a No Deal would be positive, just that it's not going to impact too negatively given the strength of the economy.

However, it's open to interpretation so I was wrong to say you made it up. Apologies.

After 3 years on here, I've learnt to choose my words very carefully, to avoid facing the wrath of the message board pedantry, grammar, spelling and nitpicking police.i still mess up regularly if I'm busy at work. Hey-ho.

As I said previously, I didn't say the chief economist of Deutsche bank said a no deal brexit would be positive. I said he thought it could be positive.

When asked , with specific reference to brexit, by the presenter, he says

"Over the medium to long term the UK economy will do well"

I interpret that as meaning a no deal brexit, could be positive.

Anyway, fair play for holding your hand up aggi.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:33 pm

AndyClaret wrote:The James O'Brien of Up the clarets.

Nice one Andy!

Apparently they both share the same high horse.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:40 pm

martin_p wrote:It’s not an EU army, but if it was what is your issue with it? Do we want to depend on the seriously unstable Donald Trump to help us out?

What worries me is two things

One the Dutch MEP quote that we need it to defeat Russia. I don’t want us attacking anyone, let alone Russia.

Two, an unelected commission can use it to suppress us the plebs.

Look at France and the yellow jackets being beaten.

Whilst the current incumbents might not do it, who knows who will get into power in the future.

People ruled by unelected bodies really need to be very careful how much power they give them.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:43 pm

I just think there might be a few posters who read the evidence and thought “ that’s sounds like an EU army” but they will not post as the regulars posters would jump on them like a tramp on chips.

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:50 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:After 3 years on here, I've learnt to choose my words very carefully, to avoid facing the wrath of the message board pedantry, grammar, spelling and nitpicking police.i still mess up regularly if I'm busy at work. Hey-ho.

As I said previously, I didn't say the chief economist of Deutsche bank said a no deal brexit would be positive. I said he thought it could be positive.

When asked , with specific reference to brexit, by the presenter, he says

"Over the medium to long term the UK economy will do well"

I interpret that as meaning a no deal brexit, could be positive.

Anyway, fair play for holding your hand up aggi.

You’ve got to admire Ringo. Nobody else would have the brass neck to accuse people of who point out and provide evidence that he is wrong of “pedantry” and “nitpicking”.

You’ve gone very quiet on the human trafficking and slavery front recently by the way.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:02 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:The EU is not a static organisation.

Never has been.

It’s always been about expansion and increased control over its members.

Just read it’s history.

You guys just seem to blindly believe it’s all good.

An organisation that has "ever closer union" at its heart as not a static organisation.

That's why anybody who voted for Remain in the 2016 People's Vote believing they were misguided if they thought they were voting to keep the statis quo.

Its was asked of brexiteers but I was told I wasn't allowed to ask the same question to remainers , for some reason. However, I'd love to know when they voted for Remain, given this commitment to "ever closer union" , did you vote for Hard Remain or a Soft Remain?

Soft Remain-

No further increases in membership fees. Ever.

British armed forces never joining an "EU defence force" maintaining independent procurement.

No single currency membership.

Never accepting the powers of the trans national EU commissioners that have been muted. Who would have the ability to intervene in nations fiscal and monetary and change them.

Not accepting the citizens of nations that join in the future under free movement of People rules.

Not joining the Schengen zone.

In other words this is as far as we go. As we are right now. The status quo.

Hard Remain-

Accept further increases in membership fees. Without limit.

British armed forces joining an "EU defence force" losing independent procurement.

Join the Euro

Accepting all new laws, rules and regulations that come from Brussels.

Accepting the citizens of any new nations that join the EU under free movement

In other words, if we're in, we're in , we're willing to accept the "ever closer union" federal states of Europe and the associated loss of sovereignty and independence.

Remoaners are only to quick to claim brexiteers didn't know what we were voting for.

How many remainers actually knew if they were Hard or Soft?

Steve1956 · Post by **Steve1956** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:05 pm

Taffy on the wing wrote:Why?.....What is wrong with Corbyn exactly?

I think he might stink...for a start.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:08 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:You’ve got to admire Ringo. Nobody else would have the brass neck to accuse people of who point out and provide evidence that he is wrong of “pedantry” and “nitpicking”.

You’ve gone very quiet on the human trafficking and slavery front recently by the way.

I'm only admitting that I try my best to cover choose my words carefully when posting. Don't always succeed. Dont want to hand remoaners what they think is a get out jail card when they've lost the arguement do I!?

As for the ending of free movement will help to end modern day slavery , people trafficking and exploitation.

It's gone quiet on that front cos I'm still waiting for the evidence from Marty that he had, that showed it wouldn't.

After all he was the one boasting of having evidence that disapproved my view. Where as I was happy to admit that I had no evidence, just an opinion. The onus was, and still is, on him.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:08 pm

AndrewJB wrote:The Rebel Alliance wins again. Johnson's duplicity with the people and their representatives has come back to bite him. No trust. And another nail in the coffin of an undemocratic no deal exit.

Now we can have a grown up discussion on all sides about what our relationship with the EU should be going forward.

That should have happened 3 years ago,but better late than never i suppose.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:11 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I just think there might be a few posters who read the evidence and thought “ that’s sounds like an EU army” but they will not post as the regulars posters would jump on them like a tramp on chips.

They'll standardise various training methods and equipment in an effort to improve the ability of the various armies within the EU to work together.

Could it lead to an EU Army in the long term?
Absolutely, but we are probably a long way off that.
Language barriers, national sovereignty etc would get in the way, but it's still a feasible idea.

Could it mean that EU nations could work together more effectively if deployed in a peace keeping capacity when under the banner of the UN?
Definitely.

They'd also work together more efficiently if someone else tried to invade Europe, but NATO has helped with this too.

NATO has issues, namely Trump not being happy with the amount spent by the US compared to Europe.

https://m.dw.com/en/us-vice-president-m ... a-50257786" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think EU member states are meant to spend a minimum amount of their GDP's on defence, 2%, but hardly any of them are doing that.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:12 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:NATO will disappear

No, it won't

Whose army is it?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:14 pm

AndyClaret wrote:The James O'Brien of Up the clarets.

Welcome back Andy

Course, the fact I've been right a lot about all this is just passing you lot right by.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:14 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:And might still happen, if people don't keep insisting on a "No Deal" Brexit.

Same to you as I've said to Dsr, both CCs and Lowbank

"Keep pushing for the most extreme Brexit possible, and the danger is that there is no Brexit at all"

And as I keep telling you, I dont want the most extreme Brexit possible at the same time I dont want the weakest.
The only way to find that middle ground is to do a deal, and the House is deliberately preventing any negotiations.

Billy Balfour · Post by **Billy Balfour** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:15 pm

Nicholas Soames taking the pee.

https://twitter.com/ladyhaja/status/116 ... 58945?s=19

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:27 pm

Billy Balfour wrote:Nicholas Soames taking the pee.

https://twitter.com/ladyhaja/status/116 ... 58945?s=19

Good banter, that.

My favourite is still the Jeremy Corbyn “who are you” moment but that isn’t far off.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:28 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Problem is he hasn't got a deal

He's promised everyone the backstop must go.

Its absolutely 100% sure that the EU will never agree to that.

There are lots and lots of reports that the EU have received no new proposals, lots and lots of reports that the UK team is 1/4 of the size of the previous one, the support base for the PM is the ERG and his Chief of Staff is the biggest "No Deal" advocate out there.

No one believes he wants a deal, because all the evidence points the other way.

The only certainty is the EU will never agree to anything, because the remainers in Parliament have given them that freedom.

If Boris was free to carry out negotiations, you dont know if he could get a deal or not. You dont think he will, fine, I think he will, but you have no more to base your opinion on than I have.
They are politicians and they never say in public what they believe in private. That's as true of the pillocks in Brussels just as much as Boris.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:32 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No, it won't

Whose army is it?

I can not argue with a person who is blind to the obvious.

We will return to this in a few years.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:33 pm

martin_p wrote:But it just said ‘Leave’ on the ballot paper. As I said, you can’t have it both ways.

Hes not trying to have it both ways, just one, leave as we voted for.

I'll make it simple for you though I'm certain you still wont get it.

A community argue over what colour they should paint the outside of the village hall. Some want Red, some want Green.
They vote on it and 51.3% vote Green.
Then those that wanted Red demand that they get to choose what shade of Green it should be.