Brexit Thread III - How to instantly polarise your country without even trying

Status
Not open for further replies.
German noble names seem to be more long winded, but the English ones just sound funnier.
That's (a) because German specialises in being long-winded and (b) your nobility were only pseudo-abolished and their titles were converted into their surnames. :)

Also I do not think he is a bumbling fool, I am sure it is an intentional act he puts on. He is clearly a self-centred skeeming *&%£ though.

Well, if it's all an act, he should probably be prosecuted for criminal negligence. How it will affect Brexit is anyone's business.
 
I am not giving this government much of a future either, but who exactly is supposed to negotiate with the EU in the meantime?

Just in case you have not noticed, the EU are not negotiating. So your question is purely theoretical.


Are they just going to let the EU write the deal themselves and present it signature-ready to the new government?

That has been what has been happening for the last two years.


Conspiracy theory: Is this all the setup for the post-modern, British version of the Dolchstoßlegende? "Brexit was going fine and Britain was on its way to a superpower again when (insert name of new government here) stabbed the valiant Brexiteers in the back by signing the shameful and disastrous treaty that became the Brexit agreement."

Nobody here believes that Britain is on its way to being a superpower again.

We can do the maths, UK is about 1% of global land area and 1% of global population.

In fact the MOD has just about realised that it can not try to imitate the USA full spectrum stategy even on a truly miniature scale,
and it will have to make a hard choice as to which functional capabilities it tries to keep and which functions it simply abandons.

But yes if the surrender agreement is signed, people here will say Britain was on its way to independence again when (insert name of new
government here) stabbed the British people in the back by signing the shameful and disastrous treaty that became the non Brexit agreement.
 
In fact the MOD has just about realised that it can not try to imitate the USA full spectrum stategy even on a truly miniature scale,
and it will have to make a hard choice as to which functional capabilities it tries to keep and which functions it simply abandons.

2% or 3% of GDP.
Cohesion between Labour-Tory or not that much cohesion on a strategy.
More depth or more breadth, more capabilities or less high-level for better exportability, more allignment to UK industry or import dependency from US.
Real choices indeed.

If industry and securing jobs have the highest priority, are most choices then not already made ?
 
But yes if the surrender agreement is signed, people here will say Britain was on its way to independence again when (insert name of new government here) stabbed the British people in the back by signing the shameful and disastrous treaty that became the non Brexit agreement.

Have you forgotten? All of Brexit was defined by one singular day in June two years ago. Absolutely everything that has happened beyond then is The Will of The PeopleTM. :rolleyes:
 
Who said this ?

And is it realistic ?

* Our priority is to get the best Brexit deal for jobs and living standards, to underpin our plans to upgrade the economy and invest in every community and region.
* During the transition period, we seek to remain in a customs union with the EU and within the single market. That means we would abide by the existing rules of both.
* We want a close future relationship with the EU based on our values.
* We respect the result of the referendum, and Britain is leaving the EU. But we do not want any deal that would do lasting damage to jobs, rights and living standards.
* We seek to negotiate a comprehensive UK-EU customs union to ensure that there are no tariffs with Europe, and help avoid any need for a hard border in Northern Ireland. Such an arrangement would need to ensure the UK would have an appropriate say on any new trade deal terms.
 
That sounds like the Labour policy on Brexit. It's going to be more realistic than any of the Tory proposals, by default, but given that Labour aren't negotiating...
 
That sounds like the Labour policy on Brexit. It's going to be more realistic than any of the Tory proposals, by default, but given that Labour aren't negotiating...

Correct :)
(did not expect that so fast)
I cut away all the lines that were only anti-Tory of the formal summary of Labour re Brexit.

It is I think also more realistic than anything of the Tories.... most certainly as start for the negotiations 2 years ago.
Perhaps the EU would also have been more willing for a kind of Norway deal adapted to some minor special wishes (just like Norway has them).
But I don't know how much would be possible in the current situation if Labour would get the rudder of the UK

(that was what I was pondering about)
 
Just in case you have not noticed, the EU are not negotiating. So your question is purely theoretical.
That has been what has been happening for the last two years.

Its the EU fault ?
The UK best trade negosiators all resigned, knowing they were in an impossible position and the goals werent realistic

But yes if the surrender agreement is signed, people here will say Britain was on its way to independence again when (insert name of new
government here) stabbed the British people in the back by signing the shameful and disastrous treaty that became the non Brexit agreement.

As the smaller economic power in this negosiation, The UK is not in a position to demand large concessions and give nothing in return.
Else you can try a hard Brexit, but who would be crazy enough to pull the trigger ?
 
Its the EU fault ?
The UK best trade negosiators all resigned,

They were even more of a B team than Gareth Southgate's side versa Belgium.


As the smaller economic power in this negosiation, The UK is not in a position to demand large concessions and give nothing in return.

From our perspective it it is the EU demanding large concessions and offering nothing in return.


Else you can try a hard Brexit, but who would be crazy enough to pull the trigger ?

Trigger already pulled, two years ago.
 
You mean your perspective. The silent majority is just that - silent.
 
From our perspective it it is the EU demanding large concessions and offering nothing in return.

I can think of some relevant Star Wars quotes:

"From my point of view the Jedi are evil!"
"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."
"This deal keeps getting worse all the time!"
 
The UK should simply Leave, and without any 18 month transition period because that is simply a trap.

The EU isn't going to accept or offer anything other than a disastrous deal before we leave.

I can think of some relevant Star Wars quotes:

"From my point of view the Jedi are evil!"
"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."
"This deal keeps getting worse all the time!"

I am not going to discuss evil.

Your other two quotes are indeed very relevant. There are some here who think that the UK
should accept a disastrous deal and try to improve it in the eighteen month transition period.
They do not understand that that is not how power dynamics work. The EU wll instead demand
further concessions during the 18 month period, and then likely renege on anything they agree.
 
Last edited:
two more resigned
a bit late spring clean up

Maria Caulfield has resigned as Tory vice-chair for women and Ben Bradley as vice-chair for youth

If I were May I would do anything to provoke the hard Brexiteers in a veiled way to put the confidence vote up

I guess she wil win that
clean ship
 
Your other two quotes are indeed very relevant. There are some here who think that the UK
should accept a disastrous deal and try to improve it in the eighteen month transition period.
They do not understand that that is not how power dynamics work. The EU wll instead demand
further concessions during the 18 month period, and then likely renege on anything they agree.

I think a lot of people just disagree with you on what constitutes a "disastrous deal."
 
On this forum, yes; the majority do disagree with me; but in Britain; it is generally accepted that the deal is disastrous.

The only debates are whether it is worse than no deal, and with the Remainers and Leavers blaming each other.

I do not believe that the UK Parliament will be able to agree, and will likely refer it back to the voters for another referendum.

A: Remain

B: The Deal

C: Leave without the Deal
 
On this forum, yes; the majority do disagree with me; but in Britain; it is generally accepted that the deal is disastrous.

I suppose I'm not the most astute observer of UK politics, but I'm pretty sure that in Britain it is not "generally accepted" that anything but the hardest of hard Brexits is "disastrous".
 
I am not going to debate with a double negative. Most people, inluding myself, would prefer a deal and are prepared to compromise.

But the EU stance isn't seen as including any compromise.
 
But the EU stance isn't seen as including any compromise.

Cameron should have known that better as nobody else
and should have based his referendum questions on that
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom