Brexit again

[Ekona]

Genuinely not fussed about a EuroArmy either way tbh. It's waaaaaaay down my agenda on things that bother me.

 

Now being stuck with a backstop that's conditional on both sides agreeing to it, that's spectacularly dreadful. I don't think there's any way around it either, not sensibly. The more I look at Brexit, the more I think you might as well go hard if you're going to do it properly, and then deal with the fallout. At this rate if the existing pre-deal does get passed by both sides (highly unlikely atm) then the markets will hate it regardless, so I don't think we'll be any better off.

[Maggz]

1 hour ago, Bullet said:

How on earth can this be taken out of context:

 

I'm not being funny, but did you watch your own video? Macron said Europe needs to be able to protect itself against Russia without needing the help or assistance of the US. 

After Krimea, Ukraine, several poisonings in the UK, how is that strange? Also considering Trump doesn't really seem to care much what Putin does in Europe.

[Maggz]

1 hour ago, Bullet said:

or this

or this

 

Again, did you watch your own video? It literally goes against what you're claiming. All she said in this video is that one day we need a European army. And people clapped.

What am I missing? How does this support your point of "these people" insinuating bad or aggressive, will have their own army. 

I'm confused...

[Maggz]

32 minutes ago, Ekona said:

Genuinely not fussed about a EuroArmy either way tbh. It's waaaaaaay down my agenda on things that bother me.

 

Now being stuck with a backstop that's conditional on both sides agreeing to it, that's spectacularly dreadful. I don't think there's any way around it either, not sensibly. The more I look at Brexit, the more I think you might as well go hard if you're going to do it properly, and then deal with the fallout. At this rate if the existing pre-deal does get passed by both sides (highly unlikely atm) then the markets will hate it regardless, so I don't think we'll be any better off.

Agreed. Brexit or no Brexit, anything we think can work down the middle, really won't. As both sides want exactly the opposite. 

But shouldn't we ask people, after we actually realise what hard Brexit is, if they really want it? 

The reason I'm asking is because just today Mr. Mogg and his supporters said the following: 

 

After we establish if those are really myths, or if we're stabbing ourselves in the back (as it's clearly not yet confirmed, or if it is, they're flat out lying), people will finally know what Brexit actually means. 

 

Is this so unreasonable? 2 years ago no one knew, it was all fearmongering according to both sides... 

[Stutopia]

WILL SOMEONE EXPLAIN HOW THE UK LEAVING THE EU STOPS THE EURO ARMY?

 

Pretty pleeeeeease.

[Maggz]

49 minutes ago, SuperStu said:

WILL SOMEONE EXPLAIN HOW THE UK LEAVING THE EU STOPS THE EURO ARMY?

 

Pretty pleeeeeease.

It doesn't. It enables is, as all the objections and vetos were from the UK. So now they're pressing for it, while they have the support

[Stutopia]

Now I’m more confused, so the video of Guy Verwhatsit means we need to stay in?

[docwra]

10 hours ago, Maggz said:

I'm not being funny, but did you watch your own video? Macron said Europe needs to be able to protect itself against Russia without needing the help or assistance of the US. 

After Krimea, Ukraine, several poisonings in the UK, how is that strange? Also considering Trump doesn't really seem to care much what Putin does in Europe.

I can only think they dont know what happened in Georgia 10 years ago, or Ukraine 2 years ago (and continues to happen), the Russians are taking back South Ossetia as we type well. It wouldnt take much for them to "give assistance against rebel forces" to some where like Moldova or Estonia, both countries where there is a lot of support for Russia - they simply arent big enough to be able to defend themselves and before you know it the USSR is creeping back towards the Berlin wall. 

 

With Far Right support growing in Poland and Scandinavia, China having an army thats bigger than most populations and looney Trump with one his hand on the big button and the other threatening to pull out of NATO why wouldnt you want an EU army?

Edited November 21, 2018 by docwra

[Maggz]

3 minutes ago, docwra said:

I can only think they dont know what happened in Georgia 10 years ago, or Ukraine 2 years ago (and continues to happen), the Russians are taking back South Ossetia as we type well. It wouldnt take much for them to "give assistance against rebel forces" to some where like Moldova or Estonia, both countries where there is a lot of support for Russia - they simply arent big enough to be able to defend themselves and before you know it the USSR is creeping back towards the Berlin wall. 

 

With Far Right support growing in Poland and Scandinavia, China having an army thats bigger than most populations and looney Trump with one his hand on the big button and the other threatening to pull out of NATO why wouldnt you want an EU army?

Exactly. And the biggest ally and country we relied on (US), isn't a reliable partner anymore, and asking them for anything in the future just gives them more leverage over the EU for whatever that orange **** wants. They care only about themselves - which is normal for any country and Union. And that's precisely why the EU needs a joint force, joint decision making, and have to start acting like one entity, and not +20 kids on a sugar rush. That's also why giving up some sovereignty for the common union goal will be required (which was what Verhofstad was talking about).

[coldel]

In answer to your question Doc, I suspect it goes along the lines of 'why should our soldiers go out and die because Russia annexes a bunch of people living 5000 miles away' - that would be a typical answer from a fervent anti-EU supporter. That's not to say there is no merit in it, its a fair question to ask. But on the other hand as you allude to Russia are looking to take back and create the USSR again, stand alone it cannot out do the US so needs extra economical capabilities as well as political influence in Europe, we should be very concerned, most in the UK admit they despise Putin and his iron foot, but seem happy to sit back and allow him to influence the political landscape of Europe. We cannot rely on the US currently, that might change in future, but Trump coming in has shown that overnight our special relationship means nothing and we are overly reliant on a partner that cannot be relied upon.

 

Stu, I looked at the first 4-5 mins of that Guy video and am equally confused, clearly some of it contains disinformation such as 'juncker not democratically put in place' even though the UK vote in MEPs who then vote in the leader. I get we do not vote directly for the leader, but the democratic process i.e we vote in MEPs who vote on our behalf is clearly there. To call it undemocratic is incorrect, but suspect its because it drives the rhetoric required. Just seems like a rant to me rather than constructive evidence based debate. I could be wrong I didnt watch it all. Its a shame that us Brits are so emotive around the issue of Europe but are one of the least engaged countries when it comes to European elections. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by coldel

[Jay84]

I know we've moved on from the EU army somewhat, but which country manufactures the most arms? The UK has companies like BAE, Rolls Royce and Airbus (who predominately use RR engines), plus RR's nuclear Sub division. Not sure about fire arms and guns, being a Derby lad its all about aero engines . 

I can see both good and bad points of an EU army. Linking back to NATO, remember the controversy globally when France voted against the 9/11 rebellion? Could that happen under similar circumstances? If anyone invaded the UK, would the EU army sit and watch? No, we're still on the doorstep and trouble will spread...it just may cost us. My big thing with big united forces are that we end up becoming 'world police' (Stu mentioned earlier), which just reminds me of Team America. 

As a huge pacifist I'd be happier (hippier?) with no army's and one global currency/agenda...maybe its the star trek in me. 

[coldel]

From memory the US and Russia build the most and export the most. Countries like Saudi Arabia and India are biggest importers. Airbus as I understand it are based in four countries, do we make the wings? I think? I imagine companies like Lockheed, Boeing and various other American aerospace businesses have the lions share of trade, we are currently importing F-35s at huge cost for instance. Not sure the army is about preventing the UK being invaded, that's very unlikely to happen, what is happening is as above, the subversive nature of Russia spreading across eastern Europe, we shouldnt stick our heads in the sand and think it wont in any way affect us. 

[Jay84]

Thanks Coldel, I thought it was that way too, it would be bloody typical to set up an EU army and chuck money at USA and Russia to mobilise it .

 

[Maggz]

https://www.businessinsider.com/top-countries-exporting-weapons-arms-sales-2018-3?r=UK&IR=T#4-germany-7

 

Now combine all EU countries and you'll be able to compare the US Vs EU Vs Rus etc

[coldel]

So May is over in Brussels today, rumours are that the DUP forced her into changes to the declaration overnight...

[Bullet]

I merely want people to consider what we are not being told

 

 

 

[Maggz]

1 minute ago, Bullet said:

I merely want people to consider what we are not being told

 

 

 

Another reputable source from which you're getting your information. I lasted all 3 mins. 

 

I really am sorry, but I can't really take your arguments seriously if you're getting your information from the  videos you've posted in this topic.

[Ekona]

Okay, so instead of telling him his source is wrong how about countering with some actual data of your own? Otherwise your argument is no better than his. 

[Jetpilot]

And therein lies the rub, you dismiss everything that doesnt fall in line with your view as non credible, as said elsewhere and re the "discussion/debate", no one is ever going to post anything from a source you believe to be credible, because you dont believe it and every source you to believe credible are pro eu, so no one can ever counter your arguments, surely you can see that, no one wins and no one is wanting to win, just putting their side and views forward. 

 

Please stop being so critical or this thread will soon be locked and as op, i will ask for it to be, eu or not eu has been done to death on here, just looking for some rational debate on recent events as per the first thread.

 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Jetpilot

[Maggz]

4 minutes ago, Ekona said:

Okay, so instead of telling him his source is wrong how about countering with some actual data of your own? Otherwise your argument is no better than his. 

I've been doing this for 2 days now. 

[Jay84]

The difficulty is, to the opposition, no source is credible as they all have a biased agenda. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Jay84

[Maggz]

2 minutes ago, Jetpilot said:

And therein lies the rub, you dismiss everything that doesnt fall in line with your view as non credible, as said elsewhere and re the "discussion/debate", no one is ever going to post anything from a source you believe to be credible, because you dont believe it and every source you to believe credible are pro eu, so no one can ever counter your arguments, surely you can see that, no one wins and no one is wanting to win, just putting their side and views forward. 

 

 

Nice try.

 

RT, Ruptly, Global news, random voiceovers,... And you think I'm dismissing it because it's not in line with my position?

No, I'm dismissing it as it's managed by a guy (Putin for anyone that needs help) who's main goal is to divide and conquer Europe. I think that's quite a low bar when it comes to expectations. Don't feed me BS from a regime that wants to cause havoc in Europe and is using its state television to support their agenda and feed propaganda. 

 

There's plenty pro-brexit articles from reputable news outlets. And before you ask me what those are, I googled it, again to remove opinions, and I present you with one example (there are many more if you care to Google for 30 seconds yourself):

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlinschoolofcreativeleadership/2017/02/01/10-journalism-brands-where-you-will-find-real-facts-rather-than-alternative-facts/

[coldel]

5 minutes ago, Jay84 said:

The difficulty is, to the opposition, no source is credible as they all have a biased agenda. 

 

It can be done if you select your sources correctly with an open mind - as Ekona hinted to in another post around selecting information to make informed decisions. For instance the ONS reports actual figures, the press however will report opinion pieces, its not fact, its opinion. Its important to note the difference if you want to come to some sort of objective conclusion yourself on issues. Stuff like the radio guy ranting is not a reliable source of factual information, its an opinion piece. You cannot decide if an issue is right or wrong from that piece, you can only use it to reinforce a pre-disposition to your own view on it.

[StevoD]

Where in the forbes link does it talk about pro brexit? 

 

I can't see it? 

[Ekona]

11 minutes ago, Maggz said:

There's plenty pro-brexit articles from reputable news outlets. And before you ask me what those are, I googled it, again to remove opinions, and I present you with one example (there are many more if you care to Google for 30 seconds yourself):

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlinschoolofcreativeleadership/2017/02/01/10-journalism-brands-where-you-will-find-real-facts-rather-than-alternative-facts/

Thank you. That makes for a much more reasonable counter-argument, however it does not state any sources to back up your claims, so ultimately isn't very helpful. If you wish to present a different side to a story, then it's up to you to provide evidence not for us to find it for you.

 

And given that list says the BBC is the 4th most trusted brand in the world, and how often the BBC itself is criticised for both left and right-leaning articles, I'm not convinced it's very helpful.