Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

What now for the EU ?

Remain didn't learn the lessons of their defeat. Instead of trying to create the conditions for a soft Brexit - and a potential return to the EU in 5 - 10 years time, they tried to derail it. Which ironically lead to a PM whom (I suspect) is happy with a WTO exit.

I also suspect that over the next 5 - 10 years we will diverge so far from the EU's body of law that it would be near impossible for us to re-join. The EU requires that you sign up to it's body of law in its entirety. In the ensuing join/stay out referendum, all the 'stay out camp' would have to do is point that out - and list all the things we'd have to give up/sign up to.
  • If the EU becomes a federal Europe (aka the United States of Europe), I doubt we'll ever re-join - and a number of other EU states will hit the exit button at that point anyway.
  • If the euro implodes - and the day of reckoning must only be 12 - 18 months off by now - the EU may have to undergo substantial reform. Only if it reverts back to to a free trade area would be we likely to re-join.
Remain knew when we were out, we were out for decades - hence their desperation to overturn the result of the referendum.

Wordsmith

But they won the argument!



. . . or was that something else?
 
I always found it slightly ironic that Remain overplayed their hand in the referendum - which contributed to them losing it.

As I've mentioned before, I campaigned on the doorstep. Many people of both the leave and remain camps thought Cameron was demeaning his office by his partisan behaviour. He would have done better to make a personal statement at the start of the campaign stating that his preference was to remain and then sat above the fray.

And then you had Osborne with his 850,000 job losses/emergency budget mantra. Most people knew that was political hyperbole. And if the chancellor was spouting obvious bollox like that, many people began to discount anything else he said as having similar provenance.

In retrospect, the Remain camp should adopt this as their theme.

View attachment 505861
Because with a less hysterical campaign they may well have won.

Wordsmith
Whilst I tend to agree, I do think that for some leavers it ran considerably deeper than just that
 

Dread

LE
Despite all the faux outrage about this type of thing eg the curved bannanas banned etc theres a logical reason to it.


standards of things like carrots mean that you have a fixed basis onto which you can design industrial machinery for the food industry and purchase raw materials - and automate the process

It's got sod-all to do with automation and everything to do with destroying the small producers and other "small-fry" in the supply chain, and leaving the market clear for the large (massive) companies that paid for lots of nice lunches and lobbying sessions with EU Commissioners (which conveniently enough are never recorded, let alone minuted).
 
It's got sod-all to do with automation and everything to do with destroying the small producers and other "small-fry" in the supply chain, and leaving the market clear for the large (massive) companies that paid for lots of nice lunches and lobbying sessions with EU Commissioners (which conveniently enough are never recorded, let alone minuted).

There's not 25,000 to 30,000 business lobbyists in Brussels for no reason.


It makes me wonder why so many Labour supporters/members love the EU so much. Like they think it's some kind of humanitarian venture who puts the needs of the people first. And not some great gravy train that enables big business to get richer while increasing job insecurity for the Great Unwashed.
 
The mistake has been to view the negotiations as trade negotiations. They are not; they are effectively a regional geopolitical power struggle, with the EU attempting to clip the wings of a country it regards as a potential powerful future competitor and baleful influence on the EU's member states.

The EU effectively started it, trying to capitalise on a weak PM (May) and a largely remain supporting parliament to impose restrictions which had no relevance to trade (ECJ/level playing field/fishing). If it were a pure trade negotiation, the EU would simply have stated that all goods sold into the EU from the UK meet EU standard's - which is all it requires of other trading nations. Mutual import tariffs would then have been a matter of negotiation.

Fortunately for the UK, the EU overplayed its hand and ended up with a PM determined to Brexit properly and with the majority to do it. The EU is now crying foul because BoJo is bending the rules to dismantle their attempts to hamstring us.

A rare instance of two wrongs ending up (from the UK's perspective) in a right.

Wordsmith

the new world order is....

in the top tier, the USA, China
in the middle tier, India, Brazil, Russia, Nigeria, the EU


its our last chance to pick a side. We can be One of the top dogs pack, or one of 2nd rate poodles getting our arses chased by the big dogs.
 

Oyibo

LE
I can't get out fishing, so instead I've been researching the interaction of EU law and international law, particularly as it relates to ECJ judgements.

The following article is quite heavy going, but bear with it and it provides some interesting insight into the judicial activism of the ECJ, and the inconsistancy of its judgements with respect to international law.

The punchline is that, as set out previously, the EU sees itself above international law where international law conflicts with EU law.

A very interesting paper. Should be interesting to see if the UK Government uses some of the examples given of the EU (ECJ) going against international law when it suits them
 
in the top tier, the USA, China
in the middle tier, India, Brazil, Russia, Nigeria, the EU

its our last chance to pick a side.

What of the third tier?
Stay out of the fecking way and let them get on with it.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
A very interesting paper. Should be interesting to see if the UK Government uses some of the examples given of the EU (ECJ) going against international law when it suits them

It had every chance to do so when the EU started screaming about the Internal Market bill breaching international law. Only a few of the Tory back benchers raised it.

A public broadside from BoJo highlighting the many breaches of international law by the EU, citing the UK's near unblemished record and stating the UK was only making one small technical breach might have worked wonders.

Wordsmith
 
Can I just say that dearest Ange (of Snail fame-pbuh) was a qualified cricket umpire.

Not a lot of people know that.

Blimey did any face slicing occur when she umpired, was anyone warned with harsh fonts?
 
Perhaps he has something up his sleeve and is keeping his powder dry?

He has played a couple of blinders in the past.

Cue bleating from the usual crowd.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top