Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
My understanding is that the Commission and the 28 other MSs would agree to an extension IF it includes a referendum on the proposed deal and/or on the question of leaving. A General Election would also be a reson to give an extension.

They will not be happy at an extension that simply kicks it further down the road.

Opinion polls indicate that the UK electorate would again vote to leave, but I am unsure about if they would vote to accept the deal.

27 MS - we are the other one. And it woukd need to be a unanimous decision, and very recently, I think this likelihood has changed significantly.

On your final point. It's an extraordinarily complicated "deal" document. If an FEP is agreed, it would be even worse. Do people honestly think its contents should be opened up to a public vote?

I don't see an extension at all. Letwin yesterday conceded there are significant holes in the Benn Act for one. And "remain becomes more likely if there is an extension" is completely wrong.
 
It may be, but it’s an historical and political truth nonetheless.....

No it isn't. There was a constant attempt at a Balance of Power in Europe prior to WW1. Germany only went for global domination under totalitarianism/fascism with Wilhelm and Hitler respectively.

The same thing happened in Italy with Mussolini and his attempts at repeating the Roman empire.

The German country, historically, has simply been the biggest nation state in Europe (or collection of affilliated states in the days of Prussia etc.), located centrally in the continent and therefore always important, both politically and economically.

You have exposed yourself as an irrational xenophobe with that reply, which is a shame.
 
No it isn't. There was a constant attempt at a Balance of Power in Europe prior to WW1. Germany only went for global domination under totalitarianism/fascism with Wilhelm and Hitler respectively.

The same thing happened in Italy with Mussolini and his attempts at repeating the Roman empire.

The German country, historically, has simply been the biggest nation state in Europe (or collection of affilliated states in the days of Prussia etc.), located centrally in the continent and therefore always important, both politically and economically.

You have exposed yourself as an irrational xenophobe with that reply, which is a shame.


I'm only surprised he stopped there. I mean the Holy Roman Empire and Charlemagne are classic examples of the dastardly Bosche.
 
So let me understand... It's ok to co-operate with NATO with all those countries, but once it's called something different it's a Bad Thing?

The EU army will not have the USA and Canada in it, nor indeed the U.K. now. The only NATO forces that can be relied upon are the USA, Canada, the U.K. and every now and again France....
 
No it isn't. There was a constant attempt at a Balance of Power in Europe prior to WW1. Germany only went for global domination under totalitarianism/fascism with Wilhelm and Hitler respectively.

The same thing happened in Italy with Mussolini and his attempts at repeating the Roman empire.

The German country, historically, has simply been the biggest nation state in Europe (or collection of affilliated states in the days of Prussia etc.), located centrally in the continent and therefore always important, both politically and economically.

You have exposed yourself as an irrational xenophobe with that reply, which is a shame.

I must have got them all wrong then......
 
Well yes, I suppose it is a skill to paint something that's demonstrably worse than what you yourself voted down under your predecessor, and have yourself said would be unthinkable for any British prime minister to do, as something great and heroic. That people appear willing to back him says less about him than it does about the scruples of those who have flipped on this. You 'could' argue that the realities of Brexit are dawning on people, but equally we saw during the Tory leadership campaign when so many used tremendous rhetoric to speak out against proroguing parliament, but then seemed to lose their tongue when it actually happened, that those on the Tory benches barely have a scruple between them.

So, basically, you want to shout a bit about your own position on Brexit and ignore anything which doesn't fit ? You should stand for parliament, you'd fit in really well !

Seriously though, none of the main parties have covered themselves with glory.

We have the tories who've ploughed on with their own take on Brexit, which they pedal because it's what most tory voters are closest to rather than what's best for the country.

We have the liberals, who, by saying they'd revoke article 50, demonstrate a total lack of understanding of what a lot of people voted for in the referendum, and come across as a set of smarmy [bad word]

... and we have the Labour party, who don't really know what they want, but, if in power, would probably negogiate a deal which tied us so close to Europe that, in it's own way, would be as far removed from the Brexit most people voted for as what no deal would have been.

Bunch of [another bad word] the lot of them. They were all so far up their own arses that they couldn't bring themselves to swallow their pride and vote for May's bill, which would have been the pragmatic thing to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top