Britain tells the EU: we shall not sell out our fishermen

[CG1 Blue]

17 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You will not extrapolate on how the EU supposedly eroded UK sovereignty because you can't and you know it's not a credible argument. 

 

Immigration is not under the control of the UK government. That same government has clearly stated that Poles and Romanians and any EU citizen can still enter the UK freely without a visa. So much for 'control' of borders. There is nothing of the sort at all. Poles and Romanians will just enter and overstay.

 

Personally I think Von der Leyen is a plagiarist, a nepotist and would not be where she is if not for the old feminists equivalent of the old boys network. However she is of course right that Greece should be supported in the face of cynical Turkish instigation of illegal mass tourism. No conundrum at all.

 

 

Prior to Brexit, did the EU have any power to impose rules and regulations on the UK and it's elected government? Did the ECJ have the powers to overrule our elected government / UK courts? Have these powers come about / increased since we joined the EEC in 1973? 

 

If the UK government decided to allow immigration for Poles and Romanians, it is still the UK government allowing it! So immigration is still under the control of the UK government ????‍♂️

 

I actually don't blame the Greeks for their actions. What I object to is hypocrisy from liberal remainers when a country breaks EU and international law. Also it's Interesting that you now class refugees as tourists! 

 

Greece has deployed military forces to the border. Greek authorities, who have reportedly stopped over 24,000 attempted crossings and arrested 183 people since Saturday, have used water canons, tear gas, and stun grenades against the migrants.

The Greek government announced Sunday that it would suspend asylum applications for one month and deport migrants who have illegally entered the country. The New York Times noted that "neither move announced by Greece is permitted by European Union law, but the Greek government said it would request special dispensation from the bloc. International protocols on the protection of refugees, of which Greece is a signatory, also prohibit such policies."

"The reckless measures being taken by the Greek authorities are a blatant breach of E.U. and international law that will put lives at risk," she said. "People seeking asylum are once again being used as bargaining chips in a callous political game."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/03/02/inhumane-and-reckless-amnesty-international-condemns-greeces-measures-block-migrants

 

 

[Logosone]

Britan sold out its coalminers.

 

And it will sell out its fishermen.

 

Here's why. Even the British know it. The British are not buying the catch of British fisheries. Europeans are. 

 

In order to get access to EU markets Britain will have to give access to waters, which btw were never British when Britian joined the common market, but were only LATER extended, by agreement of all European countries, to be where they are now. On the understanding that all European partners could fish in each other waters. Other countries have a historical right written into treaties, to fish in the area the UK now claims as its zone.

 

As explained by a British expert:

 

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2020/03/04/britains-fishing-industry-has-been-promised-a-lot-expect-cries-of-betrayal/

[melvinmelvin]

23 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

You and I have different definitions of sovereignty and a different opinion on the EU effect on it. I won't waste time going over these old arguments. And I won't claim that you fall for EU propaganda - as propaganda is also a tired argument (most often used by remainers). 

 

Immigration policy is now under the control of the UK government - that's the point. And we can show our objections (or not) at the ballot box. 

 

And as for this little speech from you: 

"There is no shining glory card for Brexit. It is, always was, and always will be, a self-centred betrayal of Europe, European values. It does not wear the feathers of sovereignty or defense against immigrants. The latter was not achieved, and the former was never an issue."

 

European values, and immigration not an issue? So how do you feel about Von Der Layen's recent comments about Greece being Europe's shield against immigration from Syria, effectively supporting the Greek authorities seen firing at refugee boats and pushing them away? Bit of a conundrum that one, for the liberal remainers!  

 

 

 

this is kinda the wrong thread, but:

your very last paragraph points to smth I consider very important,

this German lady VDL (very daft lady?) comments on both this and that in VDL style

(Juncker was WAY better even if you pommies didna fancy him)

 

what we see here is a total crash in the EU machinery

for years Italy and Greece (and Turkey) have carried a very very heavy burden re "foreigners on the move" FOTM

relatively recently EU has landed on that an unlimited influx of foreigners ain't solely a blessing

so what? mostly zilch

they leave Greece Italy and Turkey to get it sorted

they help OK, they send camping equipment and school books to the riviera and the islands

so that FOTM can lay comfortably while trying to learn English from the books

 

bloody disaster this is, very very badly handled by EU

(woudna be any better with UK in Brussels)

 

am no EU fan but I had expected better from EU re FOTM,

(my view: the FOTM challenge is just in its beginning, it will GROW GROW GROW)

 

this is the kinda potato that has potential to bring EU down,

and not a copulating kipper or anchovie in UK waters

 

(this refugee theater urinates me off no end - it weakens Europe at a time strengthening is needed)

 

 

 

 

 

[Logosone]

10 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Prior to Brexit, did the EU have any power to impose rules and regulations on the UK and it's elected government? Did the ECJ have the powers to overrule our elected government / UK courts? Have these powers come about / increased since we joined the EEC in 1973? 

 

If the UK government decided to allow immigration for Poles and Romanians, it is still the UK government allowing it! So immigration is still under the control of the UK government ????‍♂️

 

I actually don't blame the Greeks for their actions. What I object to is hypocrisy from liberal remainers when a country breaks EU and international law. Also it's Interesting that you now class refugees as tourists! 

 

Greece has deployed military forces to the border. Greek authorities, who have reportedly stopped over 24,000 attempted crossings and arrested 183 people since Saturday, have used water canons, tear gas, and stun grenades against the migrants.

The Greek government announced Sunday that it would suspend asylum applications for one month and deport migrants who have illegally entered the country. The New York Times noted that "neither move announced by Greece is permitted by European Union law, but the Greek government said it would request special dispensation from the bloc. International protocols on the protection of refugees, of which Greece is a signatory, also prohibit such policies."

"The reckless measures being taken by the Greek authorities are a blatant breach of E.U. and international law that will put lives at risk," she said. "People seeking asylum are once again being used as bargaining chips in a callous political game."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/03/02/inhumane-and-reckless-amnesty-international-condemns-greeces-measures-block-migrants

 

 

You know very well that this power of the EU to impose rules was GRANTED to the EU and RATIFIED by the British House of Commons. It was ALWAYS clear that the right of Europe to claim primacy in law was a result of the British House of Commons choosing to cede this right. And it was always clear if the House of Commons decided otherwise, as it now did that Europe would simply accept that decision. As far as I know the House of Commons is elected by the British electorate.

 

So basically on immigration you are saying we are in control of immigration by allowing Romanians and Poles to come in freely, at will, without any visa. Do you not realise how ludicrous this sounds? What kind of 'control' is that? None at all surely?

 

Greece is suspending asylum applications and deporting illegal migrants? That is absolutely permitted by EU law. Any statement to the contrary is anti-European propaganda. In times of emergency EU members have considerable freedom of action in terms of immigration.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Logosone

[CG1 Blue]

5 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

this is kinda the wrong thread, but:

your very last paragraph points to smth I consider very important,

this German lady VDL (very daft lady?) comments on both this and that in VDL style

(Juncker was WAY better even if you pommies didna fancy him)

 

what we see here is a total crash in the EU machinery

for years Italy and Greece (and Turkey) have carried a very very heavy burden re "foreigners on the move" FOTM

relatively recently EU has landed on that an unlimited influx of foreigners ain't solely a blessing

so what? mostly zilch

they leave Greece Italy and Turkey to get it sorted

they help OK, they send camping equipment and school books to the riviera and the islands

so that FOTM can lay comfortably while trying to learn English from the books

 

bloody disaster this is, very very badly handled by EU

(woudna be any better with UK in Brussels)

 

am no EU fan but I had expected better from EU re FOTM,

(my view: the FOTM challenge is just in its beginning, it will GROW GROW GROW)

 

this is the kinda potato that has potential to bring EU down,

and not a copulating kipper or anchovie in UK waters

 

(this refugee theater urinates me off no end - it weakens Europe at a time strengthening is needed)

 

 

 

 

 

Yup.  The EU tried to bribe Turkey into taking all the migrants. It was only a matter of time before that went Pete Tong. Now they endorse keeping the migrants away with guns. The EU mask of socialism is slipping. 

 

[nauseus]

17 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Cabbage.

Savoy. See?

[CG1 Blue]

4 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You know very well that this power of the EU to impose rules was GRANTED to the EU and RATIFIED by the British House of Commons. It was ALWAYS clear that the right of Europe to claim primacy in law was a result of the British House of Commons choosing to cede this right. And it was always clear if the House of Commons decided otherwise, as it now did that Europe would simply accept that decision. As far as I know the House of Commons is elected by the British electorate.

 

So basically on immigration you are saying we are in control of immigration by allowing Romanians and Poles to come in freely, at will, without any visa. Do you not realise how ludicrous this sounds? What kind of 'control' is that? None at all surely?

 

Greece is suspending asylum applications and deporting illegal migrants? That is absolutely permitted by EU law. Any statement to the contrary is anti-European propaganda. In times of emergency EU members have considerable freedom of action in terms of immigration.

How about this - is this permitted by EU law? 

 

 

Also this:

 

one migrant had died in hospital and five had been wounded. It accused Greek police and border units of opening fire on migrants in no-man's land between the Greek border gate at Kastanies and the Turkish gate at Pazakule.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51735715

 

 

[Brigand]

Fishing has become a hot potato as it has come to signify the injustice of the EU policies. The UK can't now sell-out the UK fishermen as it will be political suicide for Boris. Best the EU can hope for is a deal same as Norway where licenses are issued yearly. The present deal cannot be renewed as it's simply not politically acceptable now. That boat has sailed.

[Logosone]

17 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

what we see here is a total crash in the EU machinery

for years Italy and Greece (and Turkey) have carried a very very heavy burden re "foreigners on the move" FOTM

relatively recently EU has landed on that an unlimited influx of foreigners ain't solely a blessing

so what? mostly zilch

they leave Greece Italy and Turkey to get it sorted

they help OK, they send camping equipment and school books to the riviera and the islands

so that FOTM can lay comfortably while trying to learn English from the books

 

bloody disaster this is, very very badly handled by EU

(woudna be any better with UK in Brussels)

 

am no EU fan but I had expected better from EU re FOTM,

(my view: the FOTM challenge is just in its beginning, it will GROW GROW GROW)

 

this is the kinda potato that has potential to bring EU down,

and not a copulating kipper or anchovie in UK waters

 

(this refugee theater urinates me off no end - it weakens Europe at a time strengthening is needed)

 

 

 

 

 

Lol, the EU most certainly DID NOT leave Greece and Turkey to get it sorted. The EU took very considerable steps to establish a framework where the burden was shared. This included paying BILLIONS of Euros of EU taxpayers to aid Greece and Turkey in their efforts. 

 

There was a quota system put in place that was supposed to distribute migrants fairly, but of course this was never accepted by the usual suspects, namely Greece, Italy, UK etc.

 

Whilst the EU DID pay the billions it was obligated to pay the Turkish side has now not kept its side of the bargain.

 

Yes, this could have been handled better, namely by never accepting Greece as a EU member in the first place. Something which was a huge mistake and only achieved after Greece, with the help of Goldman Sachs cooked the books and defrauded all of Europe.

 

The migrant wave will never ever lead to the dissolution of the EU, any Brexiteers who harbour such malicious thoughts will be sorely disappointed.

 

 

Edited March 5, 2020 by Logosone

[CG1 Blue]

8 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You know very well that this power of the EU to impose rules was GRANTED to the EU and RATIFIED by the British House of Commons. It was ALWAYS clear that the right of Europe to claim primacy in law was a result of the British House of Commons choosing to cede this right. And it was always clear if the House of Commons decided otherwise, as it now did that Europe would simply accept that decision. As far as I know the House of Commons is elected by the British electorate.

 

So basically on immigration you are saying we are in control of immigration by allowing Romanians and Poles to come in freely, at will, without any visa. Do you not realise how ludicrous this sounds? What kind of 'control' is that? None at all surely?

On the first point, no matter how it came about, you at least concede that membership of the EU impacted UK sovereignty. We are now taking that back. 

 

Who made the decision to allow Poles and Romanians that freedom? And who can change that policy if it doesn't have the desired effect? Our elected UK government. 

[Logosone]

6 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

How about this - is this permitted by EU law? 

 

one migrant had died in hospital and five had been wounded. It accused Greek police and border units of opening fire on migrants in no-man's land between the Greek border gate at Kastanies and the Turkish gate at Pazakule.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51735715

 

 

Firing warning shots? Given the circumstances that is an emergency measure solely at the discretion of the Greek coast guard. I note the Greek coast guards were very restrained and ensured no migrants were harmed, shooting very far away from the boat.

 

As for the stories of people who try to enter a country illegally I believe not a single word. I will say though that if you're stupid enough to try and sail into Europe with a Dingy because Erdogan tells you to go, then perhaps you deserve to be shot at.

[nauseus]

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You know very well that this power of the EU to impose rules was GRANTED to the EU and RATIFIED by the British House of Commons. It was ALWAYS clear that the right of Europe to claim primacy in law was a result of the British House of Commons choosing to cede this right. And it was always clear if the House of Commons decided otherwise, as it now did that Europe would simply accept that decision. As far as I know the House of Commons is elected by the British electorate.

 

So basically on immigration you are saying we are in control of immigration by allowing Romanians and Poles to come in freely, at will, without any visa. Do you not realise how ludicrous this sounds? What kind of 'control' is that? None at all surely?

 

Greece is suspending asylum applications and deporting illegal migrants? That is absolutely permitted by EU law. Any statement to the contrary is anti-European propaganda. In times of emergency EU members have considerable freedom of action in terms of immigration.

A big problem is that EEC/EU legal primacy and it's effects were not explained clearly to the British people in 1972; not even by 1975. By 1973 it was too late as we were already in the EEC, after the Heath government won by a very small margin in the HoC. Any remainers complaining about lies in the referendum campaign need to consider that the deception in the early 70's was way worse. We weren't even given a referendum in 1972 and the good reason for that is that if Heath had been honest and open, the British voters would have rejected membership, and he knew that! 

[Logosone]

4 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

On the first point, no matter how it came about, you at least concede that membership of the EU impacted UK sovereignty. We are now taking that back. 

 

Who made the decision to allow Poles and Romanians that freedom? And who can change that policy if it doesn't have the desired effect? Our elected UK government. 

Thank you for addressing this point.

 

The manner of 'how it came about' is rather the key issue here. It was not the EU invading and imposing its law. The British elected representatives of the House of Commons elected to grant EU law primacy in some areas and ratified this in law. Again, last I checked the members of the HoC were elected by the British.

 

Membership of the EU obviously impacted the legislation of the UK but this was at the request, ratification and grant of the British themselves. Therefore, ultimate sovereignty was still derived by the British people. Surely this is obvious?

 

Indeed you are taking that back, and the EU has never once tried to stop that process. The very fact that Britain is ABLE to take that back rather illustrates that sovereignty was never truly impacted, as soon as the HoC decided that it would no longer cede primacy to EU law it was able to do so. Thus sovereignty was at no point compromised.

 

As for the Poles and Romanians it is a matter of actual control. Here the UK government, as always, has capitulated and said 'Poles and Romanians', like all EU nationals, simply come in without a visa. No control. No control of immigration. Poles and Romanians will just come in and overstay. This is obvious.

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

13 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Yes, this could have been handled better, namely by never accepting Greece as a EU member in the first place. Something which was a huge mistake and only achieved after Greece, with the help of Goldman Sachs cooked the books and defrauded all of Europe.

And something that Germany, France and the EU conveniently turned a blind eye to...

 

However, France and Germany broke the very rules that they had insisted on for everyone else.

Germany, the great European financial disciplinarian, was struggling because the cost of reunification with the former East Germany had left a big hole in its budget.

Mr Von Kyaw admits that Germany's government "really sinned".

"Everyone who could read the numbers could see that the numbers are off. Even if you allow for constructive accounting, or whatever."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16834815

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, CG1 Blue said:

And something that Germany, France and the EU conveniently turned a blind eye to...

 

However, France and Germany broke the very rules that they had insisted on for everyone else.

Germany, the great European financial disciplinarian, was struggling because the cost of reunification with the former East Germany had left a big hole in its budget.

Mr Von Kyaw admits that Germany's government "really sinned".

"Everyone who could read the numbers could see that the numbers are off. Even if you allow for constructive accounting, or whatever."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16834815

The majority of material I have read on this agrees with this, which is explained by the apparent desire of the EU to follow expansionism at any cost, even if it means breaking their own rules (which they do with regularity). 

 

 

[TheDark]

34 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

this is kinda the wrong thread, but:

your very last paragraph points to smth I consider very important,

this German lady VDL (very daft lady?) comments on both this and that in VDL style

(Juncker was WAY better even if you pommies didna fancy him)

 

what we see here is a total crash in the EU machinery

for years Italy and Greece (and Turkey) have carried a very very heavy burden re "foreigners on the move" FOTM

relatively recently EU has landed on that an unlimited influx of foreigners ain't solely a blessing

so what? mostly zilch

they leave Greece Italy and Turkey to get it sorted

they help OK, they send camping equipment and school books to the riviera and the islands

so that FOTM can lay comfortably while trying to learn English from the books

 

bloody disaster this is, very very badly handled by EU

(woudna be any better with UK in Brussels)

 

am no EU fan but I had expected better from EU re FOTM,

(my view: the FOTM challenge is just in its beginning, it will GROW GROW GROW)

 

this is the kinda potato that has potential to bring EU down,

and not a copulating kipper or anchovie in UK waters

 

(this refugee theater urinates me off no end - it weakens Europe at a time strengthening is needed)

Quite the opposite. When EU was surprised it's pants down in 2015, EU countries learned their lessons. What happened then can be never allowed to happen again.

 

That's why EU strike a deal with Turkey. Giving Turkey money to host the immigrants in Turkey's soil. Giving physical money to the refugees, so that the refugees in Turkey can have a decent life and decide by themselves what they need - instead of handing them food items and toilet paper, which they might not have needed.

 

EU also made sure that the Turkey hosted refugee kids were able to go to schools and get education. 

 

EU naturally did not have to do all those things, but it did, because it's a right thing to do and it's also a wise thing to do, to stop mass immigration to the EU.

 

Now when Turkey has used the immigrants for Turkey's game to gain support for Turkey killing Syrians, Greece, supported by EU, has said no to the flow of immigrants. 

 

This time EU's pants were on already. This was one of the EU's way to say to Turkey, stop playing with us. The others are on more on political and financial sides.

 

 

[Logosone]

6 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

And something that Germany, France and the EU conveniently turned a blind eye to...

 

However, France and Germany broke the very rules that they had insisted on for everyone else.

Germany, the great European financial disciplinarian, was struggling because the cost of reunification with the former East Germany had left a big hole in its budget.

Mr Von Kyaw admits that Germany's government "really sinned".

"Everyone who could read the numbers could see that the numbers are off. Even if you allow for constructive accounting, or whatever."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16834815

 

Well, yes, and it will always be a lesson to proper European countries never to trust the effectively criminal cartels of Greek fraudsters. Mistakes were made for sure, the lax enlargement mania of politicians at the time was absolutely political and unnecessary. What did we gain by accepting countries like Greece, led by lying fraudsters and criminals? Only problems. It is an absolute scandal that German taxpayer monies are used to this day to subsidise Greek extravagance.

 

So yes, mistakes were made, but to equate the very necessary flexibilisation of self-imposed debt boundaries by Germany on account of the extraordinary and massive cost of sanitising East Germany from communist mismanagement, in short achieving the glorious goal of German re-unification, to this day a shining example to the world, to equate this with the Greek shape-shifter economic fraudsters is frankly defamation of the highest order.

 

 

[Logosone]

31 minutes ago, Brigand said:

Fishing has become a hot potato as it has come to signify the injustice of the EU policies. The UK can't now sell-out the UK fishermen as it will be political suicide for Boris. Best the EU can hope for is a deal same as Norway where licenses are issued yearly. The present deal cannot be renewed as it's simply not politically acceptable now. That boat has sailed.

 

The UK will have no other option but to sell out its fishermen. Because the British are not buying the fish caught by British fishermen. The Europeans are.

 

Therefore for British fisheries to get access to the EU market, the EU has already made clear that Britain will have to grant access to British waters.

 

Either way the UK will sell out its fishermen. If it makes a deal with the EU and grants access to waters, in order to give its fishermen the right to sell fish in the EU, that's a betrayal.

 

If the UK will not make a deal and UK fishermen  will lose the free access to EU markets for their fish, that will be an even bigger betrayal.

 

Here, as elsewhere, it is the EU, not the UK, that holds all the cards.

[david555]

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

What were we promised that can never be delivered and who made those promises ?

“Easiest deal in human history”
-Liam Fox, 2016
 

[Rookiescot]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Savoy. See?

You did tell me to try your approach so I did.

[Logosone]

51 minutes ago, nauseus said:

A big problem is that EEC/EU legal primacy and it's effects were not explained clearly to the British people in 1972; not even by 1975. By 1973 it was too late as we were already in the EEC, after the Heath government won by a very small margin in the HoC. Any remainers complaining about lies in the referendum campaign need to consider that the deception in the early 70's was way worse. We weren't even given a referendum in 1972 and the good reason for that is that if Heath had been honest and open, the British voters would have rejected membership, and he knew that! 

The general concept that membership in the common market would involve certain legal obligations would have been clear to any informed observer in the 1970s.

 

As for explaining the full legal effect of the primacy of EU law on UK law to every member of the British electorate that's quite the most stupid notion I've read all day. It would hardly have been possible. Not just because the majority of the British electorate would not have understood it. Also because most lawyers had by that time not been able to gauge the full effect, it would take decades of case law for the full effect to be clear even to lawyers.

[david555]

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

Yup.  The EU tried to bribe Turkey into taking all the migrants. It was only a matter of time before that went Pete Tong. Now they endorse keeping the migrants away with guns. The EU mask of socialism is slipping. 

 

Was their not a poster who referred that U.K. would use navy ships protecting  and chasing away any foreign fishing ships ….. you think they would not need at least a shot  for the bow to do that ….? 

So when E.U. is taking control on their borders is not nice , but when U.K. Brexit use "taking control on our borders"  as their   mantra  it is O.K. …. here we go again …. 

 

So sooner or later things can get nasty if country's can not defend their borders against invasion …. sad but true... that a Turkish dictator use the vulnerable as a weapon find this as normal ? simple for a support for his Syrian campaign….

Edited March 5, 2020 by david555

[Logosone]

I can just imagine the scene. The British and French negotiators sit in a room. The British say clearly they will not accept other countries fishing in the British fishing zone.

 

The French, indignantly reply 'So you, the nation that has for centuries exploited dozens of country's natural resources for its own gain, will not share even 35% of your miserable haddock with us, your allies? Why don't you tell your fishermen to sell zeir fish to the New Zealanders, ey? NEXT LET US TALK ABOUT ZE FINANCIAL SERVICES!"

[melvinmelvin]

3 hours ago, shy coconut said:

Well if they insist on landing juvenile fish, then the stocks will deplete and there will

be no fish for anyone, but hey ho rule brittania etc

hmm, sure?

 

if you land the youngsters for a period the older boom boomers will be left in piece and quiet to multiply

if you only land those with walkers the big boom boomers wil vanish and multiplying becomes more challenging

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

Lol, the EU most certainly DID NOT leave Greece and Turkey to get it sorted. The EU took very considerable steps to establish a framework where the burden was shared. This included paying BILLIONS of Euros of EU taxpayers to aid Greece and Turkey in their efforts. 

 

There was a quota system put in place that was supposed to distribute migrants fairly, but of course this was never accepted by the usual suspects, namely Greece, Italy, UK etc.

 

Whilst the EU DID pay the billions it was obligated to pay the Turkish side has now not kept its side of the bargain.

 

Yes, this could have been handled better, namely by never accepting Greece as a EU member in the first place. Something which was a huge mistake and only achieved after Greece, with the help of Goldman Sachs cooked the books and defrauded all of Europe.

 

The migrant wave will never ever lead to the dissolution of the EU, any Brexiteers who harbour such malicious thoughts will be sorely disappointed.

 

 

yes,

but now you explain history - that scenario has passed

 

[TheDark]

14 minutes ago, Logosone said:

I can just imagine the scene. The British and French negotiators sit in a room. The British say clearly they will not accept other countries fishing in the British fishing zone.

 

The French, indignantly reply 'So you, the nation that has for centuries exploited dozens of country's natural resources for its own gain, will not share even 35% of your miserable haddock with us, your allies? Why don't you tell your fishermen to sell zeir fish to the New Zealanders, ey? NEXT LET US TALK ABOUT ZE FINANCIAL SERVICES!"

Sometime a post is so good, it deserves a smiley like and a reply.

 

This one was a stinger missile filled with glitter. Well done! ????

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, TheDark said:

Quite the opposite. When EU was surprised it's pants down in 2015, EU countries learned their lessons. What happened then can be never allowed to happen again.

 

That's why EU strike a deal with Turkey. Giving Turkey money to host the immigrants in Turkey's soil. Giving physical money to the refugees, so that the refugees in Turkey can have a decent life and decide by themselves what they need - instead of handing them food items and toilet paper, which they might not have needed.

 

EU also made sure that the Turkey hosted refugee kids were able to go to schools and get education. 

 

EU naturally did not have to do all those things, but it did, because it's a right thing to do and it's also a wise thing to do, to stop mass immigration to the EU.

 

Now when Turkey has used the immigrants for Turkey's game to gain support for Turkey killing Syrians, Greece, supported by EU, has said no to the flow of immigrants. 

 

This time EU's pants were on already. This was one of the EU's way to say to Turkey, stop playing with us. The others are on more on political and financial sides.

 

 

 

well

I don't share that perspective,

still; Italy Greece and Turkey (and Spain across the strait) are the spots where the problems manifest

and where the main struggle is

you said EU chipped in, so what? farthings ain't gonna sort this

 

apart from letting a few cross the borders EU helps by providing remedies so that the problem

will not be visible on Oxford street and Kudam

nothing wrong with that but it doesn't solve anything

 

 

[vinny41]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

 

The UK will have no other option but to sell out its fishermen. Because the British are not buying the fish caught by British fishermen. The Europeans are.

 

Therefore for British fisheries to get access to the EU market, the EU has already made clear that Britain will have to grant access to British waters.

 

Either way the UK will sell out its fishermen. If it makes a deal with the EU and grants access to waters, in order to give its fishermen the right to sell fish in the EU, that's a betrayal.

 

If the UK will not make a deal and UK fishermen  will lose the free access to EU markets for their fish, that will be an even bigger betrayal.

 

Here, as elsewhere, it is the EU, not the UK, that holds all the cards.

There is no need for the UK to sell their Fish to the EU as the UK currently imports more fish than the UK exports, 40 years ago you would find it diffcult to find a Fish and Chip shop in the UK selling mackerel, Now there are a large number of Fish and Chips shops in the UK selling Mackerel

If you believe that the EU holds all the cards Why is the EU wasting time and money  negotiating the EU could simply state here the deal we are offering Take it or leave it

[TheDark]

30 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

well

I don't share that perspective,

still; Italy Greece and Turkey (and Spain across the strait) are the spots where the problems manifest

and where the main struggle is

you said EU chipped in, so what? farthings ain't gonna sort this

 

apart from letting a few cross the borders EU helps by providing remedies so that the problem

will not be visible on Oxford street and Kudam

nothing wrong with that but it doesn't solve anything

You don't have to share the view. Simply check the news of various different EU countries, which are actually sending manpower, yes, real and physical human beings with border control background to help Greece to deal with the situations. 

 

That is what is reported right now. 

 

This problem, which is not an invasion, is being dealt as we speak.

 

Naturally the righwin leaders are keen to put out words like 'invasion', but that is not the case. Yes, there has been some people trying to enter the EU. Yes, they have been forced to go back.

 

EU being understanding and wishing to help those who suffer, does not mean it would allow it's borders to be wide open. It's now better shown during this outbreak attempt forced by Turkey.

[TheDark]

9 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

There is no need for the UK to sell their Fish to the EU as the UK currently imports more fish than the UK exports, 40 years ago you would find it diffcult to find a Fish and Chip shop in the UK selling mackerel, Now there are a large number of Fish and Chips shops in the UK selling Mackerel

If you believe that the EU holds all the cards Why is the EU wasting time and money  negotiating the EU could simply state here the deal we are offering Take it or leave it

EU wishes to guarantee the best possible outcome from Brexit So the English should wish the same. 

 

Englanders 2025 order of fish and chips, is going to be a surprise for many people.

 

While fish is a negotiating, tactics, it's hilarious people are still talking about fish and chips, while there are so many more important ideas to talk about.