By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Just goers to show that the UK is even more attractive outside of Europe?
Yes, it's quite wonderful. We've left racist Europe to create a non-racist country outside Europe where young men from all over Africa and the Middle East are being welcomed to create a new Black Muslim paradise. It's what Brexit was really all about. But, to be fair, we should be grateful to the French for helping us achieve this objective.
Good old France. They're quick enough to seize a single British trawler - but they can't see 40 dinghies crossing the Channel in one day.
You are right: if only they could see them better, they could escort them across the Channel more safely.
I reckon they must be taking backhanders from some of the top beneficiaries of Brexit, French rubber dhingy manufacturers, without paying due care and attention to health and safety regulations. Thank God we had Brexit, so we can take care of the illegal immigrants the EU doesn't want.
Meanwhile, Russia is capitalising on the weakening of the EU it financed with its Brexit campaign funding to start the rebuilding of the Eastern Bloc.
The long- term growth story for Shell still rests heavily on the oil price.
Been a shyte week for remoaners hasn't it Grumps..firstly clearing houses maintaining there EU funding/alignment (I'm sure it was claimed 230000 city jobs would be lost or moved to Paris/Dusseldorf) And now Shell looking to the future in the UK...oh and they are heavily involved in diversification from fossil fuels too Grumps.
Been a shyte week for remoaners hasn't it Grumps..firstly clearing houses maintaining there EU funding/alignment (I'm sure it was claimed 230000 city jobs would be lost or moved to Paris/Dusseldorf) And now Shell looking to the future in the UK...oh and they are heavily involved in diversification from fossil fuels too Grumps.
Brexit was ridiculous and lead to us having a clown as a prime minister.
I think we all know that Boris saw Brexit as an opportunity to become PM and whilst it took longer than he thought, he got ythere in the end by invoking the memory of Chirchill and his "heroic" defense of little England. It was a cynical exploitation of the mess that the EU had become.
And the EU was a mess. Many of their rules designed to help the smaller countries on the Eastern border, many rules designed to maintain the power of Germany and France as king makers and many rules imposed upon UK businesses and ignored by other countries who had a "special exemption".
Cameron and crew made an attempt to push the EU into a reform that clearly the French in particular did not want as it would have reduced their influence and possibly broken the power of the trades unions who remain a powerful influence in their politics. That effort failed, partly because Cameron and his administration was not the most competent at negotiating but mainly I suspect because he was trying to keep the Tory party together and trying to appease the various "Little Englander" factions within it. A hopeless task made impossible by equally diverse goals within the EU.
We have since seen the EU mis manage their own Covid response (although they were relatively quick to fix that) and fail to deal with the refugee problem in any sensible way whilst insisting on moves to bring in an EU foreign ministry, armed force and diplomatic entity.
We essentially had a choice of an EU mess that nobody who mattered had any appetite to fix or a mess of our (or Boris') making. We made our choice and now have to live with it.
I think we all know that Boris saw Brexit as an opportunity to become PM and whilst it took longer than he thought, he got ythere in the end by invoking the memory of Chirchill and his "heroic" defense of little England. It was a cynical exploitation of the mess that the EU had become.
And the EU was a mess. Many of their rules designed to help the smaller countries on the Eastern border, many rules designed to maintain the power of Germany and France as king makers and many rules imposed upon UK businesses and ignored by other countries who had a "special exemption".
Cameron and crew made an attempt to push the EU into a reform that clearly the French in particular did not want as it would have reduced their influence and possibly broken the power of the trades unions who remain a powerful influence in their politics. That effort failed, partly because Cameron and his administration was not the most competent at negotiating but mainly I suspect because he was trying to keep the Tory party together and trying to appease the various "Little Englander" factions within it. A hopeless task made impossible by equally diverse goals within the EU.
We have since seen the EU mis manage their own Covid response (although they were relatively quick to fix that) and fail to deal with the refugee problem in any sensible way whilst insisting on moves to bring in an EU foreign ministry, armed force and diplomatic entity.
We essentially had a choice of an EU mess that nobody who mattered had any appetite to fix or a mess of our (or Boris') making. We made our choice and now have to live with it.
'We made our choice and now have to live with it'
As far as leaving the EU,yes. As far as having to put up with Boris and his appalling choice of Cabinet ,no.
There was always going be a power struggle between France, Germany and yes us. But in the end it was a Union that pulled Europe together, wasn't perfect but better than going it alone.
As far as leaving the EU,yes. As far as having to put up with Boris and his appalling choice of Cabinet ,no.
There was always going be a power struggle between France, Germany and yes us. But in the end it was a Union that pulled Europe together, wasn't perfect but better than going it alone.
France rarely pull together with anyone, but have been dominated by Germany. As far as EU being a Union, true when a common market but not with Greece nor more recently with Eastern Europeans
The marginal nature of the vote reflected the marginal nature of the decision.
A softer exit would have been more appropriate in the circumstances, but the headbangers just upped the ante in terms of the polarising rhetoric, the moderates couldn’t get their act together, and we left on the most extreme terms, with a dishonest clown as a PM thrown in for good measure.
The fact that we have now established a permanent conflict of interest with our nearest neighbours, while trying to claim that there are benefit from equally compromised deals with countries thousands of miles away is just tragic.
And I await the benefits from Brexit with interest.
France rarely pull together with anyone, but have been dominated by Germany. As far as EU being a Union, true when a common market but not with Greece nor more recently with Eastern Europeans
The EU (as in the old Common Market) was originally intended to be a support mechanism for the various initiatives to keep the peace in Europe after the second war. After a stall (League of Nations) and a rebrand, it has been successful because it has brought the two European super powers (Germany and France) into alignment, most of the time.
Being part of the EU club meant that countries with a more volatile political makeup and where a populist party could achieve power for a time (Italy, Spain) would have less influence and not start marching armies over borders.
Again, largely successful.
The UK's error was in not joining from the beginning and thereby influencing the shape and policy of that beast. Instead the political parties in the UK were obsessed with the UK being a superpower in its own right. It wasn't in the 50's and 60's and probably never will be again.
The point and purpose of the EU has naturally shifted over the decades. As political stability was achieved, the EU began to believe its own publicity and growth became an objective rather than its core values. So eventually we end up with the German economic mammoth being expected to bale out the Greek economy which failed because of the actions of the Greek Gov't. We then have Eastern European states joining, not because they bring financial or technical or cultural benefits, but because they are a bulwark against Russia.
Trying to juggle the needs of 26(?) countries and thousands of ego driven politicians against the gains from acting together is hopeless.
The Tory Brexiteers had their own motives as well, many I think believing that the UK was still a super power but by the time they sent Cameron out to bring the EU into the UK line of thinking, it was too late. European leaders saw us as arrogant and ungrateful and hence we see our "punishment" continuing.
My view is that the EU was broken and that the benefits were being felt disproportionately by those countries that had in some manner failed or were members for political rather than economic reasons. The UK failed to act in time and got a bloody nose when we eventually did act. That UK action was also to satisfy the Tory party internal fighting rather than any objective pursuit of benefit to the UK.
In the end the error on both sides was to make the decision a simple "in/out" with no alternative such as a associate membership. That error was the fault of all sides.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
