Rue, Britannia <<Moderator's Warning Issued>>

I am really unsure just what a "clib member" might be. But perhaps that was just a typo.

And how would that work, exactly?

No, it cannot.

Why would you imagine that it even demands those "benefits" after exiting the EU, anyway?

 

The Government and the Brexit Party are going for a No Deal. That was my point. I have already mentioned that Johnson has lost his majority. The leavers are not complaining about trade deals which is what I replied to the other poster about.

 

Fair enough. Run away from a difficult question. Just remember that other people are reading this thread and have seen me provide sources to support my fears of the results of a hard Brexit and have seen you refuse to support your position twice.
Also, ad hom attacks are a logical fallacy and against forum rules.

 

OK, maybe you should have been more clear when you linked ''the Brexiters'' with no-deal.
I accept you spoke in good faith.
Remember, many Labour voters and Labour MPs voted to leave.

 

The negotiations come about because of 40 plus years of being intertwined. A bit like a 40 year marriage when you have to sort out the details of a divorce.
Now in a divorce if one party simply chooses to disappear, then the other party gets to keep everything, can change the locks and never deal with the departed one again.
For that the departed have to deal with the consequences, not least in real terms what happens with 'the kids', i.e (or e,g,) the one million UK citizens left behind in the house they have bogged off from.
Nobody has ever been stopped from flying flags.

 

Maybe you did not understand what I said but I do not see that as my problem.

 

Seems that Kenneth Clark, the 'father of the house' is also going to be chucked out of the Conservative Party.

 

I am emphatically not a globalist. Rather, I believe in national sovereignty. Full national sovereignty.

If someone were to propose that the US--together with Canada and Mexico (and perhaps the Central American countries also)--were to become part of some greater "North American Union," I would be totally flabbergasted!

Every country should remain fully independent--with that independence absolutely uncompromised.

And no, that is not hyperbole, either .

 

Now you can't really go about complaining about personal attacks if you are now going to suggest that I have trouble understanding what you said.
Especially when you did not make yourself clear in the first place.

 

Can you give an example of Britain having its independence compromised and losing sovereignty?

 

Thanks for the intelligent response.

To use your marriage analogy, both side naturally and willingly give up a great deal of their independence to form a union. I'm one of those who felt that this union never should have happened in the first place and that a strong, free and independent Britain was preferable to any political union. If Trade was what it was about all then it could have been negotiated much differently, much like NAFTA and CAFTA where there are no politics involved and all decisions are still made locally. There are clauses where terms and be renegotiated and also a separation clause, to again use your marriage analogy.

I spent some time in Britain as a young man and what I miss most is the British culture. The succeeding generations have no idea what's been lost. The EU is all they've ever know and now take it as normal.

 

You are describing leaving with a deal. Much like May's deal which would have had us leave the political union but remain in the single market (economic union).

 

That's a great reason why Canadians, Americans or Mexicans can never quite understand why the EU was ever initiated and then approved. Why would any self respecting country do that? I know some hoped it would put an end to their intercine warring, and others that they would serve as a counterbalance to US power but neither reason was really well thought out.

 

Look you really should look at what you say. You appear to be blind to your own actions. You made an untrue accusation against me. I clarified it and then you claimed I should be more clear how I wrote. Your answer was not even relevant given that I never said all the Tories wanted no deal and it is Tories who you are talking about leaving the Party.

I think you are just trying to harass me. Nothing to do with the thread. This thread is not for such pettiness and has a warning.

 

When were the UK's vexillogical prerogatives revoked?



Which EU nations have cast the UK as "racist" or "extreme right wing"?

Have you considered that the reason BoJo cannot secure the support of Parliament is that he is not respecting the will of the People in the manner he is attempting to abscond?

 

You said the government and the Brexit party wanted a no deal Brexit.
This is clearly incorrect as many members of the government have expressed a wish to leave with a deal (the Conservative party is the government in a coalition with the DUP). One MP has even left the government today as a result of his opposition to no-deal. 17 other members of the governing party are expected to rebel against the government in tonight's vote.

As for interpretting my correction of your statement as harrasment and not on topic I think you are mistaken.

If you are opposed to debate you may be in the wrong place. Contradiction is not the same as harrasment.

 

I have no idea who appointed you the spokesperson for Canadians, Americans, and Mexicans but, if you need to accuse Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France. Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and (as of now) the United Kingdom of a lack of self-respect, that suggests an irrational ideological extremism on your part.

Surely, they did not all choose to enter the union because they all lack national self-esteem?

The French alone have enough for everyone.

 

Please read the post before responding. I never said other EU nations have called the UK "racist" or "extreme right wing". That's happening within the UK Itself. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...claim-the-st-georges-cross-from-the-far-right

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uk...ist-symbol-says-a-quarter-of-the-English.html

 

All these nations hoped to be taken more seriously if they banded together as a group but that idea has failed also. The pretense that they were all equal and shared the same interests and cultures was a foolish conceit.

I hope to hear all the EU bureaucrats singing 'Ode To Joy' whenever their season opens.

 

That means nothing, you just quoted a series of opinion pieces from various left wing newspapers. If anything we're seeing the rise of German nationalism with the rise in their vote at the elections, one wonders will Germany continue to underfund the poorer parts of the EU. The EDL are a pointless fringe group given exaggerated importance by the media. The aforementioned MPs are their elected representatives, not their rulers except Farage isn't even that.

 

The Shamrock Awakening is the gradual loss of anti-British bigotry by Irish Nationalists.

 

Where is it proposed by the EU that all are equals and share the same interests and cultures?
The premise is that they are stronger together than divided and that trading regulations should be equal and on a level playing ground. No tariffs or regulatory differences in order to greese the wheels of commerce and strength in negotiating trade deals with non-member states by acting as a large trading block.

 

There are obviously racists and xenophobes in the UK as elsewhere. Whether they wish to remain in the EU or abscond is hardly a mystifying matter.

 

It would appear that you have expanded your portfolio, and now speak for "all these nations" in the EU as well as for Canada, the US, and Mexico.