[Politics] Brexit

[Simster]

I'm in Berlin at the moment, so you'd think that the Brexit agreement would be big news. In the paper I read this morning, there was a one paragraph story on page 3, there was more space given to Michelle Obama. Shows the significance of the UK to the Europeam psyche.

Wouldn't happen to Germany ...

Indeed. Nobody in western Europe gives a shiny shite about Brexit. It was exactly the same in Lyon in 2016 when I went to a pan-Europe conference for the company I was working for at the time - EDF. Brexit is barely news elsewhere and there are some seriously deluded people here who believe people in the EU worry about its impact.

 

[vegster]

Lots of gnashing of teeth from the deputy of the European Research Group, looks like he can't accept the deal despite not having seen the small print yet. " This is not the Brexit 17 Million people voted for ! "...…. yes, lets have economic suicide instead.

 

[wellquickwoody]

yes, did you know us brits will still be able to travel to the EU without a visa , all you need is a Blue United kingdom passport , what's not to like
regards
DR

Even if you are correct, a new Blue UK passport? That will be £150 please sir. But you only got an EU one last year costing £120? Sorry, invalid document now.

The first of many own goals.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

*Any deal is better than no deal*


I'm now going with the theory that there is a secret deal with labour to get it through Parliament in exchange for an immediate General Election.

Mmmmm....my feeling is that Corbyn finds Brexit a bit boring and isn't that bothered. The worst possible outcome for labour would be an omnishambles Brexit followed by a general election that they win. They will be blamed for the omnishambles and the fiasco that follows.

I am not actually sure why labour are screaming for a GE rather than a second vote, other than because they are now the Stupid party. It is obvious to all but the impossibly doctrinaire that we must have a second referendum. It seems it is only Brexit-till-I-die merchants, weirdos who believe that a referendum is the most powerful spell in Hogwards (more powerful even that the Cruciatus curse), and Jeremy ******** who think that We Can Never Go Back (to the people).

Mind you, if we have another referendum and team Brexit comes second, there will be civil unrest (I mean more attacks on foreigners) because the bone-head contingent are all in team Brexit. I expect that my last sentence will be read by the usual contingent as 'all Brexiters are racists' which is absolutely not what it says but, hey ho, I have all the nobbers on ignore so yah boo bollocks, and Brexit won't happen - never believed it would.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Arlene Foster is currently airborne from Belfast en route to Lonton to tear May a new one apparently.

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

The absolute shit storm from Farage etc when we leave the EU but are still tied to it will be hilarious.

But there won't though. She is saying this is the best possible deal we could get. And that is probably true.

We will just leave with no deal, which is what should have happened as soon as they EU made it clear we was not going to be able to cut all ties with them. Just a shame we didn't get on with it 18 months ago.

 

[nicko31]

Lots of gnashing of teeth from the deputy of the European Research Group, looks like he can't accept the deal despite not having seen the small print yet. " This is not the Brexit 17 Million people voted for ! "...…. yes, lets have economic suicide instead.

Andrew "I can be Irish if I want" Bridgen" was on BBC breakfast saying he reckons 48 letters will be submitted by Monday to ditch May.

The ERG really are putting Brexit in peril. No deal is far more likely to mean no Brexit, they've already been warned

 

[WATFORD zero]

But there won't though. She is saying this is the best possible deal we could get. And that is probably true.

We will just leave with no deal, which is what should have happened as soon as they EU made it clear we was not going to be able to cut all ties with them. Just a shame we didn't get on with it 18 months ago.

So if we go for 'no deal'

How long do you think it will now take to negotiate with the WTO members who have already objected to our schedule and quota submissions for our 'no deal' ?

Or maybe an easier one to start with, who are the WTO members who have already objected ?

 

[Stat Brother]

[tweet]1062450604793061377[/tweet]

 

[vegster]

Arlene Foster is currently airborne from Belfast en route to Lonton to tear May a new one apparently.

For once I feel just a tiny smidgeon of sympathy for May, give up the day job Theresa, you talked a good game, you can't deliver on anything get out.

 

[WATFORD zero]

For once I feel just a tiny smidgeon of sympathy for May, give up the day job Theresa, you talked a good game, you can't deliver on anything get out.

Whenever I start to feel any sympathy for her I remember two things

She must have known that the choice was softest of soft brexits or 'no deal' from day one (enough other people knew)
She wanted the poison chalice and, in the end, her ambition was greater than her common sense

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

Mmmmm....my feeling is that Corbyn finds Brexit a bit boring and isn't that bothered. The worst possible outcome for labour would be an omnishambles Brexit followed by a general election that they win. They will be blamed for the omnishambles and the fiasco that follows.

I am not actually sure why labour are screaming for a GE rather than a second vote, other than because they are now the Stupid party. It is obvious to all but the impossibly doctrinaire that we must have a second referendum. It seems it is only Brexit-till-I-die merchants, weirdos who believe that a referendum is the most powerful spell in Hogwards (more powerful even that the Cruciatus curse), and Jeremy ******** who think that We Can Never Go Back (to the people).

Mind you, if we have another referendum and team Brexit comes second, there will be civil unrest (I mean more attacks on foreigners) because the bone-head contingent are all in team Brexit. I expect that my last sentence will be read by the usual contingent as 'all Brexiters are racists' which is absolutely not what it says but, hey ho, I have all the nobbers on ignore so yah boo bollocks, and Brexit won't happen - never believed it would.

I don't think there is even the slightest chance that a second referendum will change the vote. In fact I think it will be a far bigger win for leave. Too many people who voted remain would vote leave, based on nothing more than there feelings for democracy.

This thread is the perfect example. There are a very few, making a huge amount of negative fuss against brexit. Most people just sit back and laugh at them, because they know that discussing anything is a waste of time, just as it is trying to convince someone deeply religious that there is no god. Most people accept that their is no god these days, but cannot be arsed to talk to the close minded.

Same with Brexit. The few are making a noise because they didn't get their own way, and the many just let them get on with it.

But put it back to the masses for a vote, the leave margin IMO will grow. Same with Scotland. If wee willy krankie had got her second vote so soon after losing the first, the Scottish remain vote would have been much wider.

That's the problem with this country. Too many loud mouths go unchallenged, and like on this thread, when someone comes along and does make a valid point that they can't answer, they'll disappear for a few days until the point is a few pages down, or they will out and out ignore them, or make them out to be a thick racist that isn't worthy of their reply.

But push comes to shove, and the population are asked to vote on the same thing within a couple of years, because the losers didn't like the result, I think the British people will vote overwhelmingly to confirm the original result.

It will just be a huge waste of time. Just like Thersa May's efforts for the past 18 months.

If the EU agree to a deal for the good of the British people, a deal that will get voted from parliament, then its not going to be a good deal for us, and we should have just left without a deal last year.

You never know the PM might surprise us. But she is a walking disaster area, so I am not holding out much hope for that!

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

So if we go for 'no deal'

How long do you think it will now take to negotiate with the WTO members who have already objected to our schedule and quota submissions for our 'no deal' ?

Or maybe an easier one to start with, who are the WTO members who have already objected ?

NO idea. Do tell. You seem to know everything there is too know about how it all work. Enlighten us all.

 

[WATFORD zero]

That's the problem with this country. Too many loud mouths go unchallenged, and like on this thread, when someone comes along and does make a valid point that they can't answer, they'll disappear for a few days until the point is a few pages down, or they will out and out ignore them, or make them out to be a thick racist that isn't worthy of their reply.

So if we go for 'no deal'

How long do you think it will now take to negotiate with the WTO members who have already objected to our schedule and quota submissions for our 'no deal' ?

Or maybe an easier one to start with, who are the WTO members who have already objected ?

NO idea. Do tell. You seem to know everything there is too know about how it all work. Enlighten us all.

So you don't understand what your preferred Brexit option means

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

And you are the perfect example of what I said.

All you do is attack anyone with a different view to your own. You love to make out how everyone else is wrong, but never actually say anything constructive. We get it, you don't want to leave the EU.

But apart from calling everyone who does thick and clueless, you add nothing. When other challenge you on a pointless point you make, you ignore it or disappear for a few days.

You asked the question of how long it would take to negotiate with the WTO members who have already objected to our schedule and quota submissions for our 'no deal' .

I said I have no idea, enlighten us. And you you can come back with is a thumbsup, well done. Makes you look like you know what you are talking about.

As someone who runs a very successful, very well paid business, I negotiate a lot. If I ever offered someone a deal that they didn't have objections to, I would be failing in my business. Of course WTO object to our initial submissions. That's why we negotiate. I would be highly concerned if they didn't object to our opening offer.

 

[WATFORD zero]

And you are the perfect example of what I said.

All you do is attack anyone with a different view to your own. You love to make out how everyone else is wrong, but never actually say anything constructive. We get it, you don't want to leave the EU.

But apart from calling everyone who does thick and clueless, you add nothing. When other challenge you on a pointless point you make, you ignore it or disappear for a few days.

You asked the question of how long it would take to negotiate with the WTO members who have already objected to our schedule and quota submissions for our 'no deal' .

I said I have no idea, enlighten us. And you you can come back with is a thumbsup, well done. Makes you look like you know what you are talking about.

As someone who runs a very successful, very well paid business, I negotiate a lot. If I ever offered someone a deal that they didn't have objections to, I would be failing in my business. Of course WTO object to our initial submissions. That's why we negotiate. I would be highly concerned if they didn't object to our opening offer.

I have explained this numerous times on this thread, but once more

In order to trade under the WTO rules, we have to submit schedules and quotas to the WTO to create the basis of our trading position.

At the end of July we submitted a schedule and quotas that was based on our schedule and quotas as a member of the EU, one of the largest trading blocs in the world.

The rest of the WTO have 3 months to raise any objections to these. (For Instance, if they think we are asking for something which they would agree with one of the largest trading blocs, but not with a single country who are the only country in the world trading solely on WTO rules).

So far USA, China, New Zealand, Brazil are reportedly amongst 20 WTO members who have objected. (Don't forget there are also Russia, India and the EU in there).

We then have to start negotiating with any countries or trading blocs that object. You can look up the history of timescales for WTO negotiations, but they aren't four and a half months.

Before retirement, I also ran a number of very successful businesses and would conduct large numbers of negotiations. I would however find out all I could about who I was negotiating with before the negotiations started. I applied the same logic to my referendum vote.

I've even found a link for you to read up

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-trade-deal-wto-liam-fox-no-deal-international-trade-a8603811.html

*edit* And, you'll notice, I manage to post on this tread without using insults

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

But there won't though. She is saying this is the best possible deal we could get. And that is probably true.

We will just leave with no deal, which is what should have happened as soon as they EU made it clear we was not going to be able to cut all ties with them. Just a shame we didn't get on with it 18 months ago.

I am certain we will not leave without a deal.

We can't, we are so unprepared it would be a complete mess.

 

[Hastings gull]

Maybe having to get several countries to agree on going to war would be a good thing? It would stop a rogue government. It possibly wpuld have stopped us wading into Iraq with the Americans.
If you have a clause that is something like "an attack one is an attack on all" then somthing like the Falklands would be pretty cut and dry.

I see what you are saying and you could of course be right -obviously it all depends on the situation. But getting 27 countries to agree on what constitutes rogue action, given that each government, despite platitudes to the contrary, will have an eye to the next election and only agree to what serves their national interest, I strongly suspect that military action will be hamstrung by politicians. I am not sure what you mean in your last sentence -presumably you are saying that a EU army would intervene on the Falklands, but would all 27 countries willingly send troops there? I was in Germany during the conflict in the 80s and all the editorials in their press were very scathing over the idea of war, urging a compromise, whatever that would have meant.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Oh come on, as if anyone on here is going to admit being one of them..........

I am and proud of it.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I see what you are saying and you could of course be right -obviously it all depends on the situation. But getting 27 countries to agree on what constitutes rogue action, given that each government, despite platitudes to the contrary, will have an eye to the next election and only agree to what serves their national interest, I strongly suspect that military action will be hamstrung by politicians. I am not sure what you mean in your last sentence -presumably you are saying that a EU army would intervene on the Falklands, but would all 27 countries willingly send troops there? I was in Germany during the conflict in the 80s and all the editorials in their press were very scathing over the idea of war, urging a compromise, whatever that would have meant.

Nato didn't back us on the Falklands either. Being part of a unified force doesn't mean countries cannot act in their own interests.