> fuse: > I will share mine ,I voted to stay in the COMMON MARKET I thought it was a good idea, after ten years I found it was not as advertised ,so when I found out about the superstate and the eu armed forces along with the immigration freedom of movement I wanted out the UK working man has been taken to the cleaners…we have had horse meat sold as beef, cars with fiddled emission figures ,truck manufactures operating a price cartel and the way the rulers treat the people ie yellow vest and Catalans .French and Germany owning our main public services under guise of privet company ie Euro tunnel ,Lastly the bile that has came out of eu from M WEBER, and a lot more to the UK and the people who wanted to leave a club they did not like where it was going and the final journey to a superstate all so the commission could strut the world stage . Is that ok
The question was about likely benefits, not the faults or dislike of the EU, of which Britain was one of the main Architects and leaders in the creation of its rules & Regs. Or HM Govt’s railway Privatisation, failure to control unfettered immigration that other EU countries did etc. etc.
we are not going to be in an eu armed forces.Immigration can be controlled " if the powers that be will not do it " we can vote to try to get people who would or at least try.Freedom of movement the traffickers and criminals friend ,dont forget we are talking women and children trafficked for ■■■ and slave trade .these criminals cross eu along with the covid virus right to the UK unhindered ,will that do for now
> fuse: > we are not going to be in an eu armed forces.Immigration can be controlled " if the powers that be will not do it " we can vote to try to get people who would or at least try.Freedom of movement the traffickers and criminals friend ,dont forget we are talking women and children trafficked for ■■■ and slave trade .these criminals cross eu along with the covid virus right to the UK unhindered ,will that do for now
All of that could have been done before, in fact, our UKIP/Brexit govt actually makes it all less likely. All those things happened as a result of a Tory Govt, nothing to do with our membership of the EU.
Whilst an EU armed force has been UKIP/ Daily Mail / Express scaremongering, it has considerable merits as does NATO.
In fact most practice operations take place with our EU allies as none of our nations are able to stand on their own against most of the likely threats we face.
whisperingsmith: > fuse: > we are not going to be in an eu armed forces.Immigration can be controlled " if the powers that be will not do it " we can vote to try to get people who would or at least try.Freedom of movement the traffickers and criminals friend ,dont forget we are talking women and children trafficked for ■■■ and slave trade .these criminals cross eu along with the covid virus right to the UK unhindered ,will that do for now
All of that could have been done before, in fact, our UKIP/Brexit govt actually makes it all less likely. All those things happened as a result of a Tory Govt, nothing to do with our membership of the EU.
Whilst an EU armed force has been UKIP/ Daily Mail / Express scaremongering, it has considerable merits as does NATO.
In fact most practice operations take place with our EU allies as none of our nations are able to stand on their own against most of the likely threats we face.
Not quite right with the scaremongering. There was talk in the echelons of the EU to create a European army when NATO started to cast its eye further afield (Afghanistan).
I believe Mrs Merkel is for a EU army for defensive measures whilst NATO was to be used for “Hard” measures.
“PD Ports announces partnership with Port of Rotterdam in latest step towards achieving future vision.”
“PD Ports’ CEO, Frans Calje, explained how the partnership with the Port of Rotterdam will ensure that Teesport remains in a prime position to support the smooth flow of goods transiting the UK post-COVID and post-Brexit.”
Stupid Brexit!
What has that to do with Brexit?
Is it an opportunity that wouldn`t have existed otherwise? Or is something that would happen anyway?
Did you not read it?
“This is an industry-leading initiative that highlights PD Ports’ unparalleled focus on customer service whilst demonstrating our proactive and joined-up thinking that will ensure the River Tees remains at the forefront of UK-EU trade, offering customers the most reliable and resilient connections between UK and EU markets.”
Im posting this to show that pan European partnerships can still work post Brexit. According to one poster we are “insignificant island , soon to be tearing itself apart and drifting away into insignificance.”
Well Done !
Headline News: Brexit does not destroy everything!
The avoidance of a loss is not the same as a victory is it?
Your evidence that life and business continues is welcome, but hardly a “win”.
Trade is not a zero sum game. Good trade agreements benefit both (all) participants. Showing us a (possible future) deal is good, but again I ask would this not have been equally possible without Brexit? Is there any benefit demonstrated here?
Not really sure why you try and spin this as “an avoidence of loss”■■ Avoidence of loss means a win to me. If Man city beat Man Utd 3-0 its classed as a win not an “avoidence of loss”
This is a gain. On top of being a sovereign state again and all that it entails.
Does seem kinda ironic that Germany is the single biggest power in Europe.
It is a bit of an economic bully in the europe as well.
Now the EU have a german as head of the European Commission.
> msgyorkie: > Not quite right with the scaremongering. There was talk in the echelons of the EU to create a European army when NATO started to cast its eye further afield (Afghanistan). > I believe Mrs Merkel is for a EU army for defensive measures whilst NATO was to be used for “Hard” measures.
The Germans could accuse the EU of wanting Turkey to join the EU, whereas it was Boris du Pfeffel Johnson that called for it.
As in any true democracy, members will promote their ideas for debate.
> adam277: > Does seem kinda ironic that Germany is the single biggest power in Europe. > It is a bit of an economic bully in the europe as well. > Now the EU have a german as head of the European Commission.
No surprise there with Britain dropping out, Germany & France will be the strongest members
whisperingsmith: > fuse: > we are not going to be in an eu armed forces.Immigration can be controlled " if the powers that be will not do it " we can vote to try to get people who would or at least try.Freedom of movement the traffickers and criminals friend ,dont forget we are talking women and children trafficked for ■■■ and slave trade .these criminals cross eu along with the covid virus right to the UK unhindered ,will that do for now
All of that could have been done before, in fact, our UKIP/Brexit govt actually makes it all less likely. All those things happened as a result of a Tory Govt, nothing to do with our membership of the EU.
Whilst an EU armed force has been UKIP/ Daily Mail / Express scaremongering, it has considerable merits as does NATO.
In fact most practice operations take place with our EU allies as none of our nations are able to stand on their own against most of the likely threats we face.
The idea immigration could be controlled under FoM is a lie
whisperingsmith: > fuse: > we are not going to be in an eu armed forces.Immigration can be controlled " if the powers that be will not do it " we can vote to try to get people who would or at least try.Freedom of movement the traffickers and criminals friend ,dont forget we are talking women and children trafficked for ■■■ and slave trade .these criminals cross eu along with the covid virus right to the UK unhindered ,will that do for now
All of that could have been done before, in fact, our UKIP/Brexit govt actually makes it all less likely. All those things happened as a result of a Tory Govt, nothing to do with our membership of the EU.
Whilst an EU armed force has been UKIP/ Daily Mail / Express scaremongering, it has considerable merits as does NATO.
In fact most practice operations take place with our EU allies as none of our nations are able to stand on their own against most of the likely threats we face.
The last time the EU attempted a military lead they royally screwed it up.
The difficulty here is defining an EU army…are they moving towards one?
whisperingsmith: In fact most practice operations take place with our EU allies as none of our nations are able to stand on their own against most of the likely threats we face. [/quote] Technically our recent ops (last 20 years or so) have been undertaken with NATO /UN allies; some of whom happen also to be EU members. Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
The issue is he is right the EU does need an army.
Unanimity is killing the EU they cant get much done unless they have full agreement with every single head of state. It was while they were so slow with vaccines.
But I dunno. The EU wants to be America with all nations being states that make up the EU. But the problem with that is people dont like it.
They will keep pushing for closer and closer integreation but it will never be enough.
whisperingsmith: > GORDON 50: > People who voted for brexit knew that the benefits would take time to come through and the downsides would be felt immediately and this is what JOB focuses on.
At last, someone who knows what the benefits of Brexit will be - the question so many of us have been asking for so long without any tangible answer.
It would greatly help the debate Gordy, if you could share with us what those benefits will be
The benefits will come further down the road as a result of no longer being in the bloc. Imagine where the EU will be in 15-20 years time as it continues to expand and integrate, even you may want out then, by which time it could be too late. I take it you know the word ‘Cabotage’, well the EU doesn’t like it and says it goes against EU principles of freedom of services etc, what do you think will happen to our domestic haulage industry if we remained? What about even more cheap labour from Albania & Serbia, or even Ukraine & Kazakstan? Now I’m not blaming immigrants here, I fully support anyone who wants to improve their lot, it’s the unequal living standards across the EU that’s causing the problems, maybe if candidate countries had be up to certain standards on minimum wage it might help, but if you allow whole swathes of countries join over a 5 year period whose average wage is about a third of the existing membership then there will be problems, ie brexit!
> GORDON 50: > The benefits will come further down the road as a result of no longer being in the bloc. Imagine where the EU will be in 15-20 years time as it continues to expand and integrate, even you may want out then, by which time it could be too late. — What about even more cheap labour from Albania & Serbia, or even Ukraine & Kazakstan? Now I’m not blaming immigrants here, I fully support anyone who wants to improve their lot, it’s the unequal living standards across the EU that’s causing the problems, maybe if candidate countries had be up to certain standards on minimum wage it might help, but if you allow whole swathes of countries join over a 5 year period whose average wage is about a third of the existing membership then there will be problems, ie brexit!
I can understand your fear of the unknown Gordy, especially as the Daily Mail has been stoking that fear for years.
BUT, if the only benefit of Brexit is that it might ameliorate some fears of the unknown - it doesn’t say much for Brexit.
whisperingsmith: > GORDON 50: > The benefits will come further down the road as a result of no longer being in the bloc. Imagine where the EU will be in 15-20 years time as it continues to expand and integrate, even you may want out then, by which time it could be too late. — What about even more cheap labour from Albania & Serbia, or even Ukraine & Kazakstan? Now I’m not blaming immigrants here, I fully support anyone who wants to improve their lot, it’s the unequal living standards across the EU that’s causing the problems, maybe if candidate countries had be up to certain standards on minimum wage it might help, but if you allow whole swathes of countries join over a 5 year period whose average wage is about a third of the existing membership then there will be problems, ie brexit!
I can understand your fear of the unknown Gordy, especially as the Daily Mail has been stoking that fear for years.
BUT, if the only benefit of Brexit is that it might ameliorate some fears of the unknown - it doesn’t say much for Brexit.
Not fear of the unknown at all…I simply don’t want to go down the road that the EU is going down. Daily mail may well have been stoking fears etc, I never read it so I wouldn’t know, I’m going on the pattern that the EU has been following for the last few years and can only see it continuing.
[quote="GORDON 50"I simply don’t want to go down the road that the EU is going down. I’m going on the pattern that the EU has been following for the last few years and can only see it continuing.[/quote]
Thanks Gordy for confirming what many of us thought:-
The reason for Brexit is not for any possible future benefit, but a dislike of the road the EU is taking.
Interesting reason - as the road the EU is taking is very much one set out by the UK Govt, when as a senior partner it
led the creation of the single market, pushed for the expansion of the EU (Boris du Pfeffel Johnson was an active
lobbyist for Turkey to join), the export/import rules we now have to follow to trade with the EU, etc. etc.
Correct me if I am wrong, but if those same people are now running the UK with an 80 seat majority & no opposition top speak of,
what will they now do differently ■■
The reason for Brexit is not for any possible future benefit, but a dislike of the road the EU is taking.
Exactly, it’s probably why most brexiters voted the way they did. A bit like a divorce or any separation, the main aim is to get out, glad you can at least begin to understand the other side of the argument, something most remainers are unwilling to even consider.
> GORDON 50: > The reason for Brexit is not for any possible future benefit, but a dislike of the road the EU is taking. > Exactly, it’s probably why most brexiters voted the way they did. A bit like a divorce or any separation, the main aim is to get out, glad you can at least begin to understand the other side of the argument, something most remainers are unwilling to even consider.
Its refreshing to have a pub type debate for a change Gordy.
BUT, when you say “a dislike of the road the EU is taking is probably why most brexiters voted the way they did.”
For me & many others, it beggars belief, as at the same time, they (Brexiteers) want the same group (Tories)
that set the ‘Road the EU is taking’ to run Britain.
I find it almost impossible to understand why anyone would trust those Eton Educated & Proven Liars, to do anything at all to our advantage.
whisperingsmith: > GORDON 50: > The reason for Brexit is not for any possible future benefit, but a dislike of the road the EU is taking. > Exactly, it’s probably why most brexiters voted the way they did. A bit like a divorce or any separation, the main aim is to get out, glad you can at least begin to understand the other side of the argument, something most remainers are unwilling to even consider.
Its refreshing to have a pub type debate for a change Gordy.
BUT, when you say “a dislike of the road the EU is taking is probably why most brexiters voted the way they did.”
For me & many others, it beggars belief, as at the same time, they (Brexiteers) want the same group (Tories)
that set the ‘Road the EU is taking’ to run Britain.
I find it almost impossible to understand why anyone would trust those Eton Educated & Proven Liars, to do anything at all to our advantage.
I think the reason for that is there was no real alternative at the last election. Boris or Corbyn were the only choices (lets face it, a vote for anyone else would be a wasted vote), I know plenty of lifelong labour voters that just couldn’t vote for Corbyn, Boris promised to get Brexit done, and a lot of true red labour seats voted for brexit, so Boris won. Ok that may not be 100% but a lot of political commentators seem to think so.
What comes next? who knows, watch this space I suppose.
