5 hours ago, bristolboy said:

And that's preferable?

 

 

To the The shambles we have now......yes.

6 minutes ago, wabothai said:

You mean you want to discuss your future with bolton the bomber?

Maybe better than Juncker the drunker. If you want to be all poetic.

6 hours ago, MRToMRT said:

The EU could prevent that by giving way on the backstop though, no? 

 

 

It will be interesting to see if the EU or the EU negotiators give way on the backstop.

 

They are different entities.

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

HMG's version:

PM meeting with US National Security Advisor John Bolton: 12 August 2019

Does bolton make the decision?

 

even if trump said it would you trust him or wait 2 mins for him to change his mind.

 

thats the whole issue, u cannot trust what trump says or any agreement he signs.

 

UK is much better served to beg the EU to delay until trump is out of office, otherwise the UK is shafted six days til sunday by everyone.

On 8/13/2019 at 7:21 AM, stevenl said:

The bigger the EU, the more it is a threat to US domination.

Exactly, Trump fell out with the EU in trade negotiations so he sees brexit as a way of getting back at them. He knows full well that post brexit the UK will turn its back on the US, and then bend over.

Highly likely it will become a binary choice for the UK, US or EU. The union is dead, long live the union.

12 hours ago, Sujo said:

Does bolton make the decision?

 

even if trump said it would you trust him or wait 2 mins for him to change his mind.

 

thats the whole issue, u cannot trust what trump says or any agreement he signs.

 

UK is much better served to beg the EU to delay until trump is out of office, otherwise the UK is shafted six days til sunday by everyone.

In a word, No. The decision would rest with congress, as it does in the UK with parliament.

Somehow I do not see congress being too happy with this proposed piecemeal agreement. Rational thinking would be that they saw the whole package before agreeing to anything. The same could be said for parliament, the first parts could be very tempting with a powerful sting in the tail.

"John Bolton doesn’t do free trade. He does regime change in countries such as North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba. He does military interventions, notoriously in Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003 and Libya in 2011. He does punitive sanctions and embargoes. He does spite."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/13/john-bolton-trade-deal-uk-colonise

 

20 hours ago, billd766 said:

There are already US bases in the UK. Lakenheath, Mildenhall, Fairford, to name but three. Greenham Common used to store cruise missiles but closed down a few years ago.

The question there Bill is Why?  Is it not time they went home, the UK have closed their permanent bases in Europe.

I was at Wyton, just a few miles from Alconbury, in the early years of the Vietnam war, not a good situation. Why should the UK be forced into supporting their disputes.

Any further agreements with the US will attract attention and could paint a bigger target on the back of the UK than it already has.

Look for an announcement from the British Government on sanctions against Iran.

 

16 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

"John Bolton doesn’t do free trade. He does regime change in countries such as North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba. He does military interventions, notoriously in Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003 and Libya in 2011. He does punitive sanctions and embargoes. He does spite."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/13/john-bolton-trade-deal-uk-colonise

 

And he sends other people's son's and daughter's to do it.

21 hours ago, NightSky said:

Oh and whilst your at it drop your taxes of the large tech corps that are running half the globe by now because we (the US) wants to keep all those taxes for ourselves

While major corporations pay zero tax in the USA. What are you on about?

20 hours ago, vogie said:

It would appear that the US of A are willing to sit down with us and discuss our future unlike the EU who are being totally belligerent and irresponsible as to the consequences of their actions. 

Yes. Because the USA in well known for their global responsibility and calm attitude under the current admin...

4 minutes ago, mikebike said:

While major corporations pay zero tax in the USA. What are you on about?

Trump has stated that any UK/US trade deal is contingent on the UK shelving changes to the tax laws that will require online US companies to pay taxes in the UK (at the point of delivery).

 

Essentially dictating to the UK what UK tax laws should be.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Trump has stated that any UK/US trade deal is contingent on the UK shelving changes to the tax laws that will require online US companies to pay taxes in the UK (at the point of delivery).

 

Essentially dictating to the UK what UK tax laws should be.

What? The poster I was replying to was postulating the USA wanted lower corporate taxes in the UK so it could collect more at home. I pointed out that many big corps in the USA pay NO tax. What does your comment have to do with any of that?

2 minutes ago, mikebike said:

What? The poster I was replying to was postulating the USA wanted lower corporate taxes in the UK so it could collect more at home. I pointed out that many big corps in the USA pay NO tax. What does your comment have to do with any of that?

I’m clarifying precisely what the US is about.

 

Dictating the UK’s tax laws.

2 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Yes. Because the USA in well known for their global responsibility and calm attitude under the current admin...

Whilst the current regime of the EU are being extremely mealy mouthed and totally dumb.

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

Exactly, Trump fell out with the EU in trade negotiations so he sees brexit as a way of getting back at them. He knows full well that post brexit the UK will turn its back on the US, and then bend over.

Highly likely it will become a binary choice for the UK, US or EU. The union is dead, long live the union.

Trump supported Brexit before he was even elected President, so that theory simply doesn't hold water.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/05/donald-trump-brexit-uk-leaving-european-union

 

 

16 minutes ago, usviphotography said:

Trump supported Brexit before he was even elected President, so that theory simply doesn't hold water.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/05/donald-trump-brexit-uk-leaving-european-union

 

 

I doubt he gave it much thought, but Bannon did and Putin certainly has.

"John Bolton's proposal for sectoral U.S.-U.K. trade deals post Brexit has caused excitement in London, but cynical trade experts are not convinced."

"The U.S. didn’t get to where they are in the world by being unnecessarily nice to countries that are slightly desperate.”

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

The question there Bill is Why?  Is it not time they went home, the UK have closed their permanent bases in Europe.

I was at Wyton, just a few miles from Alconbury, in the early years of the Vietnam war, not a good situation. Why should the UK be forced into supporting their disputes.

Any further agreements with the US will attract attention and could paint a bigger target on the back of the UK than it already has.

TBH Sandy I really have no idea why they are still here other than being operation stations and also for Refors and staging through.

 

I agree wholeheartedly that the UK should be forced into supporting their disputes. We were unnecessarily dragged into the Iranian tanker off Gibraltar and we lost one of ours in a tit for tat off Iran.

 

IMHO Trump has done a great disservice to the USA in alienating friends and allies which will take years or decades to repair.

12 minutes ago, Opl said:

"John Bolton's proposal for sectoral U.S.-U.K. trade deals post Brexit has caused excitement in London, but cynical trade experts are not convinced."

"The U.S. didn’t get to where they are in the world by being unnecessarily nice to countries that are slightly desperate.”

it's very rare that countries make trade deals sector by sector, extremely rare and mainly happen only when one of the countries is desperate for a deal

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m clarifying precisely what the US is about.

 

Dictating the UK’s tax laws.

Funny, that's what the EU want to do.

50 minutes ago, usviphotography said:

Trump supported Brexit before he was even elected President, so that theory simply doesn't hold water.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/05/donald-trump-brexit-uk-leaving-european-union

 

 

It wasn't a theory. 

35 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I doubt he gave it much thought, but Bannon did and Putin certainly has.

Mind reading again?

16 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

it's very rare that countries make trade deals sector by sector, extremely rare and mainly happen only when one of the countries is desperate for a deal

Desperate.

11 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Mind reading again?

Nope. I judge by actions not words.

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Desperate.

Yes, as in a Post Brexit UK (we are told likely no-deal Brexit) desperate for a trade deal.

It's actually extremely unlikely that the Congress would approve a piecemeal deal with the UK. If you do a search using the following terms, there's a good explanation:

How realistic is a sectoral trade deal between US and UK?

57 minutes ago, billd766 said:

TBH Sandy I really have no idea why they are still here other than being operation stations and also for Refors and staging through.

 

I agree wholeheartedly that the UK should be forced into supporting their disputes. We were unnecessarily dragged into the Iranian tanker off Gibraltar and we lost one of ours in a tit for tat off Iran.

 

IMHO Trump has done a great disservice to the USA in alienating friends and allies which will take years or decades to repair.

One of problems is that the US has been able to shout the odds at the world with a certain amount of protection through distance, with allies in the vicinity taking most of the flak from terrorist incidents.

Leaving the EU is one thing but getting into bed with the Americans will bring about a whole new security level to the UK, which can hardly be said to be in the national interest.

3 minutes ago, sandyf said:

One of problems is that the US has been able to shout the odds at the world with a certain amount of protection through distance, with allies in the vicinity taking most of the flak from terrorist incidents.

Leaving the EU is one thing but getting into bed with the Americans will bring about a whole new security level to the UK, which can hardly be said to be in the national interest.

Especially with the US dictating UK polices and actions that increase the likelihood of the UK becoming embroiled in unnecessary US generated conflicts.