Is Britain about to leave the EU?
- Thread starter Mega Tsunami
- Start date
- Status
trader/warrior
Deity
I don't quite understand the argument, though I must admit I might be even more tuned out of the overall news picture these days, and seeing more of the Anglo- than the Eurosphere as well coming from a generally English-understanding Anti-EU country.
The Germans acting conciliatory seems quite high-minded and nice, watching out for the best interests of the overall european market (including their own ofc). But leaving or not is entirely in the hands of the British themselves, hurting everyone but hurting the british most of all, it has been made clear that for the moment at least, the british getting a "Norwegian option + extra special treatment(again
)" to satisfy the leave campaign anti immigration rhetoric is not on the table. As far as the Europeans are concerned, the British have already said no to the common market unless they go back on their word, and leaving right now or in two years or whatever is entirely up to the British themselves, as Shia LaBeouf would say, "Just Do It. Yesterday you said today". I don't think the remaining EU "big Two" would mind the wholesale plundering of the British financial sector this would involve as it stands, and if the British wish for more negotiations first, Europe will look after it's own interests rather than the current openness while the British still have the opportunity to go back on their word. If you see the continent being more dependant on the small group of islands than vice-versa, I don't understand your logic.
EnglishEdward
Deity
Been talked about in Off Topic enough.
The Leave campaign is not just what Boris Johnson said.
One justification for the EEC/EC/EU is that it prevents wars in Europe.
Only problem is that it didn't. Various EC member states encouraged
Slovenia to split (foolishly thinking that because the Warsaw Pact and
USSR split up without war, Yugoslavia would split up peaceably).
And of course the EU encouraged the coup in Ukraine that created a crisis.
So after two wars, most people in the UK don't buy the EU prevents war argument.
My question was about unemployment in the Eurozone not in the UK.
Your statement above is unrelated to that question.
By the way if you believe that the finance sector needs to be regulated by the EU,
then your statement "with the UK being the one vetoing any regulation on the
finance sector" is in itself a reason for Brexit that the rest of the EU should agree with.
I suppose "out of the blue" means I am not debating within the box set by your axioms.
Why should I?
Your mastery of UK politics is unparalleled, clearly, but at what point ever has Parliament spoken with one voice? That is explicitly why it won't be plain sailing.
It also happens to be true.
While this is important, of course, it's hardly the crucial topic that Leavers seem to make out that it is (or at least, we not having access to EU markets will hurt us far more than the EU not having access to UK markets).
Has a poll actually been taken on that question or are you just pontificating about the silent majority again?
EnglishEdward
Deity
I think I have a different interpretation of the 'Leave campaign' than some here.
I regard everyone who has argued in favour of leaving as being part of the Leave
campaign, although obviously not collectively responsible for other Leave views.
Others seem to think that the Leave campaign refers only to the official,
as recognised by the UK Electoral Commission, Leave campaign,
although its relation to Nigel Farage is oblique.
As indicated earlier, I do not believe that 'oldies' such as me have paid that
much attention to what the officially recognised Leave campaign said.
It is not so much as we regard them as outright liars, but as prone to
exaggeration and being selective with the truth.
It is the information we have had over the decades that drove our vote to 'Leave'.
I'm afraid I don't understand yours, period. I do think that Germany and France have more to lose than Britain here.
EnglishEdward
Deity
I have seen no evidence for this. That may be your opinion, but it is not mine.
If you like I am pontificating, but I do talk to people in pubs etc.
The fact that the EU has backpedalled on making the claim since the Yugoslavian tragedy
implies EU recognition that the EU failed and/or is no longer believed.
People over a certain age here remember the EU begging Bill Clinton to get involved.
Don't be daft. If there's anything that has been said repeatedly, it's the various economic arguments. You're perfectly entitled not to believe them, but to say that they simply don't exist is silly.
Akka
Moody old mage.
Well, I guess you've decided to up the ante on the grasping at straws. That's just some epic-level one here.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
Pray tell how was the EU supposed to stop a civil war in Yugoslavia which mind you had minimal ties to European Union as it was then and which occurred because of rising nationalism, ethnic tensions and economic mismanagement. Does any of this sound familiar to you?
Rising nationalism fomented by idiotic local politicians who spurn the once-idealised brotherhood and unity of all constituent states… ethnic tensions… economic mismanagement by a government that is not that representative but blames it all on someone else… an indifferent EU, doesn't ring a bell, no.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,378
I don't think we should derail this tread to a discussion on the wars in former Yugoslavia. But to start with, you can only have a civil war inf the parties have the capability to wage war, and the expectation to be recognized as independent countries. Several leading member states of the EU were not neutral, in providing those things to some of the parties.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
I don't know what you are talking about, my village armed itself by buying some small armaments from South America. The more expensive military hardware and greater quantity of small arms was smuggled through Hungary (the WP leftovers) and flown by mercenary Russian pilots. The funding for that was by some ex-pats communities and IOUs from the fledgling government at the time.
^Just look at how Croatia 'suddenly' acquired heavy arms. You can't really order those from S.Africa. It was pretty obvious at the time that they were sponsored by Austria (and ultimately Germany).
Shouldn't forget the follow-up Kosovo war, where Eu really acted like a fiend.
Re Britain being the deciding factor in the 2003 EU mass-expansion: no. They were an excellent pretext, though. Isn't it pretty clear just which country the 2003+ member states helped make hegenomic? Hint: Not Britain.
It is quite nicely ironic that the 2003 expansion was signed in official ceremony in Athens. It was the burial of any half-decent Eu being ever possible again.
Shouldn't forget the follow-up Kosovo war, where Eu really acted like a fiend.
Re Britain being the deciding factor in the 2003 EU mass-expansion: no. They were an excellent pretext, though. Isn't it pretty clear just which country the 2003+ member states helped make hegenomic? Hint: Not Britain.
It is quite nicely ironic that the 2003 expansion was signed in official ceremony in Athens. It was the burial of any half-decent Eu being ever possible again.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
Yeah no, nobody in the EU wanted this mess, they were really secretly hoping the Serbs would just roll over things...like I told you the majority of that ex-WP arsenal was smuggled through Hungary, which was not in the EU at the time. The government paid for those weapons itself, of which there is extensive documentation and scandals because a number of Croatian businessmen misappropriated part of the funds. Western arms came from South America, namely Chile and Argentina. Ex-pat community had a hand in getting those over here too.
The treaty (about Kosovo, not the first wars) asked that Serbia provides full access to foreign militaries (eg Nato). That was pretty much an ultimatum no one would answer positively. Seems to be a theme with Serbia and ultimatums 
Don't recall the earlier war treaties, i was in my earliest of teens at the time.
Anyway, i am not an expert on Croatia, yet at the time of the war it was very widespread info that they were backed both financially and militarily (albeit in some covert fashion) by Austria-Germany. The ties there are not exactly hard to spot either. But it's not the topic of the thread, nor would i personally have any insight to offer on this...
Don't recall the earlier war treaties, i was in my earliest of teens at the time.Anyway, i am not an expert on Croatia, yet at the time of the war it was very widespread info that they were backed both financially and militarily (albeit in some covert fashion) by Austria-Germany. The ties there are not exactly hard to spot either. But it's not the topic of the thread, nor would i personally have any insight to offer on this...
Kozmos
Jew Detective
Well migrants workers, which was not an insubstantial part of Yugoslav economy (foreign income that was sent to families here) most often worked in those countries. Private citizens did buy a variety of small arms from various sellers, a notable Greek one too. Kosovo was a different mess, albeit one that tied into the dreams of Greater Serbia and its hegemonism from the previous system.
Anyway I do not wish to derail further, I just wanted opine from personal experience and thought that the handling of Yugoslavian break-up as a reason for leaving the EU is scraping the barrel for argument and to remind people this whole sovereignty business based on nationalism is a dumb and dangerous exercise. But maybe people need cluster bombings of their cities every once in a while to remember.
Anyway I do not wish to derail further, I just wanted opine from personal experience and thought that the handling of Yugoslavian break-up as a reason for leaving the EU is scraping the barrel for argument and to remind people this whole sovereignty business based on nationalism is a dumb and dangerous exercise. But maybe people need cluster bombings of their cities every once in a while to remember.
FriendlyFire
Codex WMDicanious
Doesn't that really tell more about your unwillingness to be informed than the quality of argument? Nobody else, remain or leave, have said that the other side hasn't presented any valid argument. If you read back this thread you'll come across with arguments pro remain. It isn't really that hard to find it. You actually have to put on a lot of effort to avoid it.
It's ridiculous to even think that the other side wouldn't have any reasonable arguments. Most people admit there are, but that the pros just weight more than cons, or vice versa.
- Status
Similar threads
