UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[talahtnut]

20 minutes ago, Grouse said:

That seems rather improbable. But we should be drawing in our horns. Huge air craft carriers for American F35s? Whose idea was that? Nuclear deterrent worth every penny though 

UKs nukes are old fashioned, messy and, could be wiped out with little or no warning.

 

Although, dropping one on Westminster, the enemy within, seems quite tempting.

Edited November 25, 2018 by talahtnut
justify

[vinny41]

10 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I take it the phrase "national responsibilities" went over your head.

 

“The path we have taken leads step by step to an ‘army of Europeans’. [That means] military forces that remain national responsibilities, but that are closely linked, uniformly equipped, and trained and ready for joint operations,” Ursula von der Leyen, the German defence minister, wrote in an opinion piece for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung at the weekend. 

https://www.ft.com/content/272daf9a-ec49-11e8-89c8-d36339d835c0

Yeah and we all seen what the EU does start eroding anything that weakens there position little by little

What the EU want at the moment is their opening gambit card not the final solution

[sandyf]

2 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Not sure what the response of the people would be to that.  Certainly would be justified on paper but it would be looked at as a cop out I would have thought.

Difficult one that, you would never know without asking again.

The judges are already enemies of the people so no change there. Looks like TM may have shot herself in the foot again, may not have got to court if she had done something about it.

[sandyf]

2 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Yeah and we all seen what the EU does start eroding anything that weakens there position little by little

What the EU want at the moment is their opening gambit card not the final solution

Poor excuse for making things up.

"Staying in the EU would mean no British Army, No RAF and No  British Navy"

[vinny41]

23 minutes ago, sandyf said:

The brexiteers mocked when 2 years ago I said not every horse first past the post was a winner, there can be disqualifications from a stewards enquiry.

An enquiry on the referendum result is about to begin.

 

The High Court will rule as early as Christmas whether Brexit should be declared “void”, in a legal case given a turbo-boost by the criminal investigation into Leave funder Arron Banks.

Judges are poised to fast track the potentially explosive challenge, after Theresa May’s refusal to act on the growing evidence of illegality in the 2016 referendum campaign, The Independent can reveal.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-void-high-court-ruling-arron-banks-investigation-when-december-christmas-a8649001.html

You noticed that "void" is in quotes there is a reason for that the case will not make any such rulings on that date 

The court case is for a number of UK Expats in Spain to

"We will aim to convince the High Court that our case is arguable, and not out of time - essentially arguing against the court’s current rationale for denying permission to proceed. We hope to be granted a substantive hearing, and that our case be expedited due to the urgency of our challenge"

https://www.ukineuchallenge.com/

[vinny41]

2 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Poor excuse for making things up.

"Staying in the EU would mean no British Army, No RAF and No  British Navy"

Clegg Idiocy, EU Army is Dangerous Fantasy Lie (April 2014)

 

[SheungWan]

10 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

UKs nukes are old fashioned, messy and, could be wiped out with little or no warning.

Although, dropping one on Westminster, the enemy within, seems quite tempting.

That's why the security services keep an eye on the Hard Right.

[sandyf]

5 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

You noticed that "void" is in quotes there is a reason for that the case will not make any such rulings on that date 

The court case is for a number of UK Expats in Spain to

"We will aim to convince the High Court that our case is arguable, and not out of time - essentially arguing against the court’s current rationale for denying permission to proceed. We hope to be granted a substantive hearing, and that our case be expedited due to the urgency of our challenge"

https://www.ukineuchallenge.com/

You are hardly in a position to say what the court will do. Starts on Dec 7th so we should be aware of the facts shortly.

[SheungWan]

5 hours ago, talahtnut said:

Oh dear, I feel Its like administering medicine to a dead parrot.

Apparently, Brexiteer Conspiracy Theorists do mock-ups of that in their basements every weekend.

[dunroaming]

Am I the only one who finds May's plea to the British public to back her Brexit deal a bit bizarre?  The phone in programmes and the open letter today pleading with people to back her plan.  She has said that the people have voted for Brexit and so she is not letting them have a say again so what does she think she will achieve by all this?

 

All I can think is that she wants people to lobby their MP's but how naïve is that.  Maybe I am missing something here unless she is weighing up actually giving the people  another say?  After all she is famous for her U-turns.

Edited November 25, 2018 by dunroaming

[vinny41]

1 minute ago, sandyf said:

You are hardly in a position to say what the court will do. Starts on Dec 7th so we should be aware of the facts shortly.

It does seem that I am in a better position than whoever wrote the  The   Independent article.

As the submission letter states the Dec 7th Court hearing is for one side to put forward "We will aim to convince the High Court that our case is arguable, and not out of time - essentially arguing against the court’s current rationale for denying permission to proceed. We hope to be granted a substantive hearing, and that our case be expedited due to the urgency of our challenge."

 

So they are putting forward arguments for there case to be heard   nothing more nothing less

[SheungWan]

1 minute ago, dunroaming said:

Am I the only one who finds May's plea to the British public to back her Brexit deal a bit bizarre?  The phone in programmes and the open letter today pleading with people to back her plan.  She has said that the people have voted for Brexit and so she is not letting them have a say again so what does she think she will achieve by all this?

All I can think is that she wants people to lobby their MP's but how naïve is that.  Maybe I am missing something here unless she is weighing up actually giving the people the another say?  After all she is famous for her U-turns.

She is driving hard for the Centre Ground, to not be outflanked by either the Remain or Hard Brexiteer forces. As a viable option it might be narrow, but it might work. The bizarre would be the Remain and Hard Brexit supporters getting into bed together to bring May down.

[dunroaming]

 

1 minute ago, SheungWan said:

She is driving hard for the Centre Ground, to not be outflanked by either the Remain or Hard Brexiteer forces. As a viable option it might be narrow, but it might work. The bizarre would be the Remain and Hard Brexit supporters getting into bed together to bring May down.

It's a bit like the carrot and the stick as far as bringing May's deal down.  The carrot for Brexiteers being the no-deal scenario and the stick being the scrapping of Brexit.  The reverse for the remainers.  Which is why, I suspect, it is left hanging.

[melvinmelvin]

38 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I take it the phrase "national responsibilities" went over your head.

 

“The path we have taken leads step by step to an ‘army of Europeans’. [That means] military forces that remain national responsibilities, but that are closely linked, uniformly equipped, and trained and ready for joint operations,” Ursula von der Leyen, the German defence minister, wrote in an opinion piece for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung at the weekend. 

https://www.ft.com/content/272daf9a-ec49-11e8-89c8-d36339d835c0

 

thank you for the kind offer to subscribe to ft

a heavy burden fell off my shoulders when I received this generous offer

 

[AGareth2]

39 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Not sure what the response of the people would be to that.  Certainly would be justified on paper but it would be looked at as a cop out I would have thought.

another referendum on the cards

[tebee]

15 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

She is driving hard for the Centre Ground, to not be outflanked by either the Remain or Hard Brexiteer forces. As a viable option it might be narrow, but it might work. The bizarre would be the Remain and Hard Brexit supporters getting into bed together to bring May down.

I'm trying to think of it in terms of game theory - some variation on the prisoner's dilemma maybe?

 

Neither side  can risk going against her, otherwise the outcome they most fear happens ?

 

Is this all just a cynical ploy by May to retain power? 

[talahtnut]

29 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Apparently, Brexiteer Conspiracy Theorists do mock-ups of that in their basements every weekend.

In reality, the Remmies and Polly, are conspiring

against the peoples vote.   Thats the theory of

the dead parrot. The final solution I fear would

be to pluck it.

 

[tebee]

39 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

thank you for the kind offer to subscribe to ft

a heavy burden fell off my shoulders when I received this generous offer

 

 

 

    EU ministers have agreed a slew of joint military projects ranging from a spy school to a new generation of land battlefield missiles — but the niche ambitions of the moves suggest the prospect of a European army remains distant, the ventures under the 25-country Pesco initiative show how the EU urgently wants to improve its capabilities without cutting across Nato’s responsibility for Europe’s collective defence in the face of rising tensions with Russia. 

 

Analysts see recent calls for a European army by the leaders of France and Germany as largely rhetorical commitments to a task the EU is neither able nor willing to take on. 

 

“The term European army is very imprecise, it's a bit like talking about the United States of Europe: you can talk about it but it is clearly not meant to happen tomorrow,” said Ulrike Franke, a defence analyst at the European Council on Foreign Relations, “A real European army would mean a genuine fusion of Europe’s armed forces, and that is not something that we want to do or can do in the next few decades.” 
 

[SheungWan]

34 minutes ago, tebee said:

I'm trying to think of it in terms of game theory - some variation on the prisoner's dilemma maybe?

Neither side  can risk going against her, otherwise the outcome they most fear happens ?

Is this all just a cynical ploy by May to retain power? 

What it is is an option down the Centre. The Hard Brexiteers and Remain forces can disrupt but cannot deliver.

[SheungWan]

15 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

In reality, the Remmies and Polly, are conspiring

against the peoples vote.   Thats the theory of

the dead parrot. The final solution I fear would

be to pluck it.

Brexiteer Conspiracy Theorists and reality are oxymorons.

[tebee]

Just now, SheungWan said:

What it is is an option down the Centre. The Hard Brexiteers and Remain forces can disrupt but cannot deliver.

Yes, so neither side are happy with it, but they are happy because the other side has not won!

 

It could work.

 

It's just a shame it such a terrible deal.

[SheungWan]

1 minute ago, tebee said:

Yes, so neither side are happy with it, but they are happy because the other side has not won!

It could work.

It's just a shame it such a terrible deal.

The terrible deal is Disorderly Exit.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, vinny41 said:

Angela Merkel calls for creation of 'real, true' EU army

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/emmanuel-macron-eu-army-european-france-angela-merkel-germany-trump-a8631806.html

And Trumps response on Tuesday was

 

"On Tuesday the US president tweeted: “Emmanuel Macron suggests building its own army to protect Europe against the U.S., China and Russia. But it was Germany in World Wars One & Two – How did that work out for France? They were starting to learn German in Paris before the U.S. came along. Pay for NATO or not!”

 

My answer to cadet Bonespur is where the USA from 1914 to 1917 and from 1939 to 1941?

 

Granted among the Poles, Czechs, French, Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian, Danish, Canadian, South African, ANZUK, Russian forces etc not to mention the British and Commonwealth forces there were a few US citizens who volunteered to fight.

 

Meanwhile the USA was making a load of profit on lease lend which wasn't fully paid off by the UK until 31 December 2006,

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_British_national_debt#World_War_II

 

As during World War I, the US again provided the major source of funds, this time via low-interest loans and also through the Lend Lease Act. Even at the end of the war Britain needed American financial assistance, and in 1945 Britain took a loan for $586 million (about £145 million at 1945 exchange rates), and in addition a further $3.7 billion line of credit (about £930m at 1945 exchange rates). The debt was to be paid off in 50 annual repayments commencing in 1950. Some of these loans were only paid off in the early 21st century. On 31 December 2006, Britain made a final payment of about $83m (£45.5m) and thereby discharged the last of its war loans from the US.

By the end of World War II Britain had amassed an immense debt of £21 billion. Much of this was held in foreign hands, with around £3.4 billion being owed overseas (mainly to creditors in the United States), a sum which represented around one third of annual GDP.[10]

[tebee]

Just now, SheungWan said:

The terrible deal is Disorderly Exit.

No, that's the cataclysmic deal, this is just the terrible one  

[AGareth2]

4 minutes ago, tebee said:

Yes, so neither side are happy with it, but they are happy because the other side has not won!

 

It could work.

 

It's just a shame it such a terrible deal.

the thing was there never was going to be a good deal

the question is - is this the best bad deal?

[SheungWan]

Just now, AGareth2 said:

the thing was there never was going to be a good deal

the question is - is this the best bad deal?

TINA.

[SheungWan]

1 minute ago, tebee said:

No, that's the cataclysmic deal, this is just the terrible one  

The cleanest shirt in the dirty laundry basket.

[AGareth2]

1 minute ago, SheungWan said:

TINA.

Turner?

[tebee]

1 minute ago, AGareth2 said:

the thing was there never was going to be a good deal

the question is - is this the best bad deal?

 

i would say it probably was if ending FOM is a given.

 

Some sort of EEA deal would be a better bad deal though.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, vinny41 said:

Clegg Idiocy, EU Army is Dangerous Fantasy Lie (April 2014)

 

I wonder if Nick Clegg and the LibDems are eating their words and choking on them now?