Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

UK Politics Hamsterwheel MkII

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

UK Politics Hamsterwheel MkII

Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:02
  #5821 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Parapunter: A bog standard, ill thought out, vitriolic response from you! Read my post again. I was neither blaming nor supporting either side. I was pointing out what I believe is, from what I see and read in the media, an inconsistency in the EU's attitude. They constantly demand the UK government (of whom I am not a fan) provide "suggestions" while offering none themselves.
Now, either point out where was the error in my argument or shut up, preferably after apologising.
Your response, while to be expected, is a tour de force in your stupid, one-eyed panoply of insults.
More pointless insults - on both sides.

It was the UK's unilateral decision to leave the EU which started this, and the EU has no obligation to change its rules to suit an ex-member.

Personally I'll be bloody glad when March 30th comes and we can all see what actually transpires. Perhaps we can all calm down then, or is that too much to hope for?.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:03
  #5822 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
ROFL........
Aah, the Pro-EU party holding true to the EU methodology
Let's face it if the EU actually survives another 10 years in it's current form then democracy in Europa will be something only found in modern history texts
Hyperdark is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:05
  #5823 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 738
You may not have noticed, but that thousand years ended with the formation of the EEC, now the EU. Not a bad achievement, eh?
So the EEC was founded in 1945 then? There's a surprise. The 62 years since the formation of the EEC hardly outweighs 1,000 years (a figure I plucked out of the air, solely to underline my argument).
PN was right in pointing out that your claim
the central European nations have been at peace for over 70 years
is incorrect. It could be argued that some of them are "still at it".
KelvinD is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:08
  #5824 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by Hussar 54 View Post
I'm one of the many, many millions who credit NATO for the lack of conflict - although I must agree with you that there are millions who do mistakenly credit the EEC because it suits their agenda.
Since when has NATO stepped in - or attempted to do so - or threatened to do so - between EU nations?

NATO (read the US) - is in Europe to forestall a Russian move west. If Russia wasn't where it is, neither would NATO be. The US has no other interest to have forces here,
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:10
  #5825 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Here
Posts: 307
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
During the seemingly never ending arguing over this bloody "Backstop", we see an endless stream of UK politicians going to Brussels and saying words to the effect of "Tell, you what. How about we modify that part of the agreement with xxx". And the response seems to unfailingly be "No we won't accept that". This morning I heard a French politician on the Today programme blathering on about what must or must not happen in this regard. To be honest, my subconscious brain filtered out a lot of what she was saying. After all, isn't the UK government negotiating with the EU, not France? She got up my nose somewhat when she began pontificating on how it is the EU's job to ensure the Good Friday agreement was preserved. And there was I, thinking that was a bilateral agreement between the UK and Ireland! It then occurred to me, that we constantly read of EU rebuffs of UK suggestions of a suitable modification of the Backstop arrangement with the comment being made, more than once, that the UK must offer alternatives, must state their objectives etc but I can not recall reading, even once, of suggestions or ideas being put forward by the EU. The stance of the EU is to stonewall the UK entirely with a constant drone of "No" while not offering anything remotely positive. I thought a negotiation usually involved at least 2 parties putting forward ideas/demands with each party successively modifying their demands, creeping closer to the stance of the other party. With both sides doing that, eventually, a compromise is reached. If the EU has nothing to offer in the way of a compromise, even one that may be rejected by the UK, then it is obvious they are not really negotiating at all. If that is the EU's idea of negotiating then small wonder they have spent the last thousand years squabbling and fighting with each other.
The EU don’t need to negotiate or make any kind of gesture. They are happy with the May ‘deal’ as it gives them what they what - a mechanism for keeping the UK in a permanent customs union. Macron has made it very clear for example that he will use this mechanism to keep us in the CU unless we relent on future access for French fleets in UK waters. The Spanish have made similar noises over the future of Gibraltar. It is blackmail. This is why we need to ‘fix’ the May deal, but the EU doesn’t need to ‘fix’ anything. If I were in the EU’s position frankly I would do the same. What the EU does fear is a no-deal Brexit where the UK will be free of all EU shackles and control. That is why, I believe, no-deal should remain on the table - but our MP’s have scuppered this - our only strong negotiating card. The wild card in all this, in my view, is Varadkar (sp?). A no deal Brexit would be bad for the UK, bad for mainland EU, but it would absolutely, mind bogglingly catastrophic for Eire.
yellowtriumph is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:14
  #5826 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
So the EEC was founded in 1945 then? There's a surprise. The 62 years since the formation of the EEC hardly outweighs 1,000 years (a figure I plucked out of the air, solely to underline my argument).
PN was right in pointing out that your claim is incorrect. It could be argued that some of them are "still at it".
You dismiss those 62 years as what - a happy accident? When was the last time that there were no wars across Europe for as many decades?

OK if you insist, change central to western. I was referring to the counties central to the world wars, i.e, France and Germany.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:15
  #5827 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,437
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
I can not recall reading, even once, of suggestions or ideas being put forward by the EU
Why would you think they need to? We have created a problem, not them, why on earth is it their responsibility to solve it?
Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:16
  #5828 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sunny Sussex
Posts: 778
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Parapunter: A bog standard, ill thought out, vitriolic response from you! Read my post again. I was neither blaming nor supporting either side. I was pointing out what I believe is, from what I see and read in the media, an inconsistency in the EU's attitude. They constantly demand the UK government (of whom I am not a fan) provide "suggestions" while offering none themselves.
Now, either point out where was the error in my argument or shut up, preferably after apologising.
Your response, while to be expected, is a tour de force in your stupid, one-eyed panoply of insults.
Not really. Reading it once was sufficient. I said nothing inaccurate. If you dislike it, I suggest applying a little more critical thinking to your observations, for example:

Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
It then occurred to me, that we constantly read of EU rebuffs of UK suggestions of a suitable modification of the Backstop arrangement with the comment being made, more than once, that the UK must offer alternatives, must state their objectives etc but I can not recall reading, even once, of suggestions or ideas being put forward by the EU. The stance of the EU is to stonewall the UK entirely with a constant drone of "No" while not offering anything remotely positive.
is as one eyed as anything I've read here in what is a hugely crowded field.
Parapunter is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:23
  #5829 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 936
So lets see....£33m to save Grayling yet more embarrassment ....if this is possible.....no problem !

A request from police chiefs for around £15m........?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47481301

Forgot to say, sorry, some time ago...welcome back Hussar....hope the treatment goes well ....just don't go nicking any medicines wot should be coming to the UK OK !...we know what you Continental types are like by jove !
Krystal n chips is online now  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:25
  #5830 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Hyeres, France
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
Since when has NATO stepped in - or attempted to do so - or threatened to do so - between EU nations?

NATO (read the US) - is in Europe to forestall a Russian move west. If Russia wasn't where it is, neither would NATO be. The US has no other interest to have forces here,

There you go then - no need for NATO whatsoever because its members would declare war on each other if they weren't members of the EU. even if they are members of NATO.

I think you'd better try again with that one....


As for NATO / USA / Russia - yes, I agree. USA has been shielding Europe from the possibility of Russia attacking countries to its western borders for more than 60 years, but I, for one, thank God that it has even if you're one of the millions who don't.
Hussar 54 is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:43
  #5831 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25
NATO has kept peace in Europe. Long before the EU came into existence. Democracy has helped to maintain and spread that peace. The EU's questionable approach to democracy could be the biggest future threat to that peace. And civil wars (remembering that the EU wants to be a 'country' so any war within it would be a civil war) are always the nastiest.
NoelEvans is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 19:00
  #5832 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,622
To put NATO in its historic context

Lord Hastings Lionel Ismay was NATO’s first Secretary General, a position he was initially reluctant to accept. By the end of his tenure however, Ismay had become the biggest advocate of the organisation he had famously said earlier on in his political career, was created to [i=left]“keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.”
[/i]
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 19:21
  #5833 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by yellowtriumph View Post

... A no deal Brexit would be bad for the UK, bad for mainland EU, but it would absolutely, mind bogglingly catastrophic for Eire.
Absolutely spot on.

And I do agree with KelvinD that I get thoroughly fed up when I hear EU politicians yabbering on about "The Good Friday Agreement". They never give me the feeling for one moment that they actually understand anything about it , but rather than they are 'hijacking' it for their own narrowed political purposes. Could they just shut up and leave it to the actual participants of the Good Friday Agreement to deal with that aspect of it themselves?

And if whole the Northern Ireland border is "going to be a problem", who is going to 'close' it? The UK have said that they will keep it open. So if the only problem with the 'Brexit deal' is Irish Border and keeping it open and the UK has said that they will keep it open regardless, where is the problem? Oh, I forgot: 'Leo-the-Vrad' said that he didn't want 'chlorine washed chicken or hormone treated beef' coming into Eire from Britain (do we actually have those in Britain?). So he is the one that will close that border. Well, as yellowtriumph has to accurately pointed out, Eire will lose disastrously from a no-deal Brexit, so the ball should be firmly back in his court: go on, Britain has said they won't close that border, now Eire's turn to say the same and then the entire problem goes away.

Come on everyone, just Get On With It!!
NoelEvans is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 19:30
  #5834 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sunny Sussex
Posts: 778
I love it when the geniuses cling on to the Britain will never close the border thing. it's always such an in depth, deep dive into the nuanced nuts and bolts of how easy this whole thing is, a brave exposé of the duplicitous pollys.
Parapunter is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 19:59
  #5835 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: England
Posts: 247
Originally Posted by NoelEvans View Post
Correction: It ended with the formation of NATO. Nowt to do with that 'EU thingie'.
Quite correct.
A number of EU countries are now actively talking about forming a European Army.
Good idea. Actually no.

So they form a European Army. What would be the command structure. What would be the language.
How do we then transport the troops and equipment.
We will use existing Transport Aircraft operated by the Nations.
Ok. How do we defend the Transport Aircraft.
Maybe we should have a European Airforce.
All the time Putin is watching and waiting.

Ok. If we have a European Army and Air Force why are we still paying for NATO.
Maybe we can reduce our funding for NATO.
Now the USA gets fed up of paying so much for NATO when the European countries reduce their payment.
All the time Putin watches and rubs his hands together and continues his planning.

Buster15 is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 21:05
  #5836 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Here
Posts: 307
Originally Posted by Parapunter View Post
I love it when the geniuses cling on to the Britain will never close the border thing. it's always such an in depth, deep dive into the nuanced nuts and bolts of how easy this whole thing is, a brave exposé of the duplicitous pollys.
What do you make of the Attorney General’s comments on the matter (taken in the round) today? From the BBC News website:

“Geoffrey Cox said plans to solve the deadlock over the Irish backstop were "as clear as day", with just days until MPs vote on the Brexit deal.”
yellowtriumph is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 21:41
  #5837 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Hyeres, France
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by Buster15 View Post
Quite correct.
A number of EU countries are now actively talking about forming a European Army.
Good idea. Actually no.

So they form a European Army. What would be the command structure. What would be the language.
How do we then transport the troops and equipment.
We will use existing Transport Aircraft operated by the Nations.
Ok. How do we defend the Transport Aircraft.
Maybe we should have a European Airforce.
All the time Putin is watching and waiting.

Ok. If we have a European Army and Air Force why are we still paying for NATO.
Maybe we can reduce our funding for NATO.
Now the USA gets fed up of paying so much for NATO when the European countries reduce their payment.
All the time Putin watches and rubs his hands together and continues his planning.

It's the old question, isn't it ?


Would you be prepared to die for your country ?

Well....I don't really want to....But I suppose if I had to, then OK....

And would you be prepared to die for the EU ?

No f*cking chance....


And the idiots in Brussels and Paris and Berlin think that Putin isn't p*ssing himself with laughter while he's watching and planning and waiting.....

Hussar 54 is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 00:35
  #5838 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 1
In decades to come the European army will exist in the future and in reality solely to impose the will of the dictators upon the citizens of the economically subjugated countries of Europe.
This is nothing more nor less than the precedent of history repeating itself, as it has done from at least the time of Charlemagne.
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 03:11
  #5839 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 63
Posts: 3
As it currently stands, all British law devolves downward from the Crown. Government ministers, police, armed forces, judges and other professions swear an oath of loyalty to serve The Queen. In principle The Queen is above all law and by international treaty technically immune from prosecution anywhere on the planet. The reality is slightly different as Charles II discovered to his cost. However the monarchy was restored in the absence of a better form of government for the UK.

In event of an European Defence Force being established, where exactly would those serving in such forces loyalty then lie? Taking an oath to uphold the defence of the EU in general as opposed to the defence of your home nation would in effect be to deny citizenship of one's home country. As the old saying goes, a dog cannot serve two masters.

Will the future bring a European political elite dispensing law and order, supported by officers sworn only to protect and support their masters in Brussels or Strasbourg or wherever? That is a very chilling and Orwellian prospect for the future. Withdrawal from the EU will at least serve to protect the UK from the dilemma that would be caused by an increasingly federalised Europe.

As far as Russia is concerned, the prospect of a unified European Defence Force operating under the command of a single leader, perhaps the European President, would be viewed as representing a very real threat to the security of their borders. The current fragmented approach with various NATO forces cooperating as best they can and with varied and frequently incompatible equipment means that no serious threat to Russia can be considered to exist. The situation changes if a large well trained military force is developed with a unified command structure and equipment. More so if those forces have sworn alliegence and loyalty to a single person.

The UK would do well to step away from the prospect of becoming a member of such an organisation and stick to just supplying weapons and equipment, something we a still surprisingly good at, judging by the contribution arms sales make to our balance of payments.
G0ULI is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 05:55
  #5840 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 936
Politicians are fond of cutting ribbons to declare venues, roads, eve railways are "now open "......sadly, cutting ribbons is unlikely to feature in Treezas diary....

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...border-cartoon
Krystal n chips is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.