dunroaming

It's not rocket science.  The EU want a quick resolve to brexit and they will do as much as they can to avoid giving the UK any concessions. To do so would encourage other member countries to opt out. It's logical to take that approach.  The UK will try to get the best deal without suffering too much economic trauma. 

May has agreed to outline  a broad brush of the targets she will try to achieve before triggering article 51 after pressure to do so.  I think this is important because we need to know just how much compromise the government are prepared to negotiate on our behalf.  Too much compromise and the whole exercise will have been a failure and too little may mean we will be economically badly damaged.  So far we are getting mixed messages about movement of people and financial contributions and this needs clarification.

Whilst I think Trump was right to question the price of AF1 and kudos to him for that, but by announcing it to the world, Boeing shares immediately drop and their reputation is tarnished.  Now that was just Trump shouting "Look at me!" and just plain stupid.

Without knowing how much of the girls encounter was consensual it is hard to make judgements.  It could be a couple of naïve girls willingly spending time with the bikers and it getting out of hand or on the other hand it could have been abduction, forced drinking and gang rape.  Or indeed anything in between.

too comment on what the girls were wearing is just plain stupid.

When I was first with my wife I never really understood why she was so dismissive of monks.  It didn't take too long though to see them for what they are.

1 minute ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

yanks seem to be in the business of extending wars now a days. still better than speaking german however.

Or in the instance of Iraq thought it was all over when in fact it was just warming up.  But that is another story

26 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

wow you were taught that in school? impressive. think england only just finished off paying her war time debts to america. i have tried to discuss this with some americans but they dont seem to like the topic. we should still be great full to america for helping sort everything out even if incredible costs were incurred.

Never sure about the way history is translated and certainly the British had a warped view of the "Empire".  The USA certainly shortened some wars and for that we should be grateful.

Short list seems to be Nigel, Trump or Putin.  I think that says it all really.

1 hour ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

instead of putting the troops on high alert at the coming attack, the valuable aircraft carriers were moved out to sea and the old frigates were left in port. President Franklin D.Roosevelt was looking for a way to get into the war which the general public were very much against.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8932197/Pearl-Harbour-memo-shows-US-warned-of-Japanese-attack.html

the outcome was a world war and america emerging as the global super power built on the sales of weapons to england and russia. tons to read on the topic.

every single war america has been involve in has had some sort of event like pearl harbor to get the ball rolling.

 

That's what we were taught in the UK as well.  maybe in the US they record history differently.

5 hours ago, webfact said:

Since the election, however, Trump has sent mixed signals on the topic

Duh!  He hasn't got a clue but that hasn't stopped him so far

The way things are going in 2016 nothing surprises me anymore.  I know I will wake up sometime and it will all have been a dream.

Carson may not have any qualifications for the role he has been given but if he can tie his own shoe laces he is better qualified than Trump for President.  All common sense has been thrown out of the window.

It's his ship now and I am afraid you are all passengers.  Where he will take you nobody knows, especially him!

9 hours ago, webfact said:

Thai media reports the deceased was an intern at the UN in Thailand.

She was not a tourist. She worked for the UN in Thailand.

Of course China manipulate their currency for economic gain, they would be stupid if they didn't.  It is common practice with countries when their exports are struggling or they want a bigger share of the market..  Britain has de-valued the pound before now for similar reasons.

4 hours ago, notmyself said:

MPs already voted on having a referendum and they voted yes.

 

 

 

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38200115

 

Now they want to vote again because they didn't get the result they expected. Please go in the direction of 'away' and stop trying to scuttle the ship because all this BS is damaging the economy. I suspect that this is the very reason it was taken to court in the first place. So they could damage the UK and in a couple of years say 'told you so' with a grin on their face.

 

You lost, get over it.

You really need a new tag line.  It is not about losing the vote it is about  damage limitation.  The way it looks at the moment is that nobody is winning.  The object of running it through Parliament is to try to protect our interests as we negotiate the divorce, not to stop it..

5 hours ago, gemini81 said:

1) The right to bear arms

2) Head to south Chicago for a refreshing perspective on why you might need one for self defense.

Unless he is going to live there why would he do that? Of course he could go to Rhode Island and see why he doesn't need to carry a gun but hey! that would weaken the argument somewhat.

3 hours ago, jesimps said:

"I think having a very small pool of people who are ardent Brexiteers making all the decisions is unfair and unbalanced."

 

Even though that was what was voted for in the referendum? People were asked if they wanted to leave the EU and the decision was "Yes". There was no mention of leaving but still allowing the free movement of people. Getting back control of our own borders was, IMHO, one of the main reasons people voted "Leave".

 

Now I'm ok with parliament having its say in ratifying the vote, even though it never rubber-stamped our entry to the EU, but I object strongly to it interfering with the wishes of the people as per the referendum.

 

By the way, who are the "small pool of Brexiteers making all the decisions? The PM herself was a "Remainer".

 

Yes the PM was a remainer but she appointed the people to orchestrate brexit and they were all passionate brexiteers.  David Davis and Liam Fox in charge and she also made Boris Johnson the Foreign Secretary.  They were all staunch brexiteers and ran the brexit campaign..

I think you are right that many people voted for brexit because of immigration and controlling the borders. The problem was that they voted based on the promises of the campaign and many of them were lies.  Sometimes not deliberate lies but born of ignorance of the outcome.  What we have to do now is try to get the best deal we can and slowly Davis, Johnson and the boys are conceding that we will probably have to accept the free movement of people in return for the single market agreement.  They will also probably have to pay in to the EU as well.  Of course the alternative is to go for a hard brexit with a complete break and no single market.  We would have control of our borders but the government would have to commit millions if not billions to compensate the car manufacturers and in fact any other large companies that rely on trade with Europe.

On the other hand if Italy and France go hard right then that would probably see the collapse of the EU.  Without any EU the relevant member countries could negotiate a new pact that works.  Then we would certainly all be winners.  The EU is outdated and is a shambles as it is now.

1 hour ago, impulse said:

Or he may be the Anti-Christ.  (Okay, that's an exaggeration)

But probably not much of one!

Trump is going at China like a drunk in a bar. The Chinese are not only far more savvy but also very powerful.  He seems to underestimate them and that could be costly.  but it's his ship so...

22 minutes ago, ALFREDO said:

Where you get your informations from. Lol?

Until now the FPÖ right wing party had maximum around 30 % in Parliamentary elections.

We have to wait for the next one to see the outcome. ☺

I am deliriously happy to be proved wrong and thank you for your input!

3 minutes ago, democratus said:

Even if the Supreme Court decides Parliaments consent is required before official Brexit negotiations can commence - and even if Parliament refuses to give said consent - then surely all Theresa May has to do is create 100 new lords, on the condition they vote for Brexit negotiations to commence?

Nice thought!  I wouldn't want parliament to reverse the brexit decision but they should have a say in the outcome of the negotiations.  They represent all of us and should do that accordingly.

20 minutes ago, sgtsabai said:

that's funny dunroaming. Well not really. While a law enforcement officer in northern New Mexico we had a vast space to cover, usually single person patrol and little back up, just other agencies that would come to each other's help. Bunch of us sitting together one day talking about a community up in the mountains (we were in the mountains) that just seemed to breed bad guys and was a constant source of trouble both in and out of the community. Jokingly we all though we should chip in, buy the ammo for them and let them just kill each other. Well, law enforcement people along with EMT's etc. tend to have a warped sense of humor. I'll add, it was already the wild, wild west up there, nobody went unarmed including my wife at the time and there were no rules. Our local magistrate and friend, another VN Vet, was headed down to Espanola (we often said we would give it to the Russians as a sacrifice to bomb) when some gang baggers pulled up along side and stuck a gun out the window. He calmly said to his gf, "open the glove box and hand to me please" and commenced to shoot the hell out of the gang banger's engine. Reload and continue on. Some of you will never understand why we carried, but I'm not asking you to, just mind your own business.

 

Nobody is going to take away the right to own a gun in America, but there does have to be some control over the types of people that become mass killers. The signs are nearly always there, there just isn't any help for those people anymore.

My post was satire, always is when this subject comes up. I get your take on it and understand that when you are in a completely lawless area with many bad guys then you need to protect yourself and if they have guns then you need them too.  I would hope though that that isn't a description of the USA as a whole?  I lived for a while in Boston and New York and although Boston isn't typical New York has it's moments.  I never felt the need to carry a gun and apart from one armed robbery I never saw guns being fired.  I am sure that there are other areas where that isn't the case, maybe each state should make it's own gun laws?

One thing is for sure, you create the society you live in and if guns are an integral part of that society who are we to criticise?

One thing is for sure, Trump will decide based on what Trump wants and not what is best for the USA.

2 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

I hadn't realised the decision wasn't expected until next year!

 

Stupid really, as of course such an important decision would take some time  (embarrassed emoticon).

Well given that we are only just over three weeks away from next year I think that is practical.  This is a landmark hearing and it is important to get the right result, whatever that will be.

If there was another referendum I would vote leave, not because I believe in that decision but because that is now the fair way to proceed.  However I am in favour of the rules of engagement being made by parliament because that would make the playing field far more level.  I think having a very small pool of people who are ardent Brexiteers making all the decisions is unfair and unbalanced.

1 hour ago, Geoffggi said:

I really do wish people would stop Trump bashing before he has had a chance to show what he can do, talk about "Spoilt Brat Syndrome" (It's my bat and ball and if you don't play to my rules we won't play at all) just because he won't cow tail to what the "Old Boys" want, he is not being given a chance; give the man every opportunity before finding him guilty prior to the offence, I personally wish him all the best of luck and hope he really does well also kicks the establishment's ass..!!!

I agree, this is Trump's ship now and he has to be allowed to steer it where he wants to.  The abyss is out there and he can either head for it or away from it.  If he wants to go toe to toe with China then so be it.  It is his call. 

Give everyone who wants a gun, a gun  They want that wild west lifestyle so let them have it.  Just make one simple rule.  If someone doesn't have a gun then they are not in the game and you can't shoot them.  I would go along with that!