Brexit: The Last Stand (No name calling)

Thomas__

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

BBDBB wrote: »

Ok, if it is a threat I can see how it would be ultimately self defeating

However in what way is it a threat?

Trade, security & the various judicial elements pertains to it are indeed linked, it's in the nature of them to be so. That's not an opinion, that's simply how they have to be in order to work. If you influence one you inevitably influence the others. If you strengthen one you strengthen the others, if you weaken one you weaken the others

Well, NATO works well regarding security matters. For instance, Turkey is not a member of the EU but co-operates in NATO. Similarly, Ireland is a member of the EU and not of NATO.


The EU certainly sees it as a threat. This today from the head of the European Parliament in response to May's threat:

“close cooperation on defence and intelligence should continue with the UK whether there is a deal [on trade] or not.”

Similarly, The Europena Parliament's chief negotiator, Guy Verhostadt, reacted angrily and said:

“What we shall never accept is that there is a trade off between the one and other. Saying, oh, we can do a good deal on security – internal and external – but there is also a deal that we want on trade and economics. I think the security of our citizens is far too important to start a trade off from one to the other. From our point of view both are absolutely necessary.”

This from the head of the Socialists in the European Parlliament:

“It would be outrageous to play with people’s lives in these negotiations. This has not been a good start by Theresa May. It feels like blackmail, but security is a good for all our citizens and not a bargaining chip. We still hope that Theresa May can get back on the right track … This was not a smart move.”

And so on.


Universally, across Europe and Britain, it has been interpreted as a threat Even the Torygraph has this heading:

Theresa May invokes Cold War and warns EU of consequences after triggering Article 50


So it is seen as a threat by Britain at home and abroad.

Why exactly can a country not co-operate on security matters, e.g. defence pacts, pooling counterterrorist intel and extradition treaties, if it doesn't have a free trade agreement with the EU?

Because the Brits are still suffering from a mental fall back into imperial times and think that it is right to let their ugly imperialism is rearing his head once again, to please Mr Farage and his hard way Brexiteers.

A Little Pony

Thomas__ wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

steddyeddy wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Deary me, you still banging on about it. Deal with the here and now on this debate. You can't have it all your own way Steddy, you need to negotiate. If Sinn Fein want an act for Irish, then expect Unionists to put across our wishes.

They don't have to put anything across. It's not a tit for tat. The unionists aren't actually giving anything up by respecting another culture.

 You want equality one way. Unionists have wishes too as outlined, that is what negotiations are about.

There might be a prospect arising in which the wishes of the Unionist won´t be that relevant anymore in the near future and they´d be better advised to adopt to the present in order to gain the future in a UI. For among the various wishes on their side, the top of it is still to keep NI "British", as long as there is a UK existing. When that UK is thrown into history, things will change rapidly whether they like it or not. Where there is no UK anymore, all loyalty and reason to it will be gone.

This attitude of domination has never worked as seen from the past, so why are you just ignoring the debate of what is actually being discussed? Banging on about the future of the United Kingdom when the discussion in the last few pages is about the executive getting up and running again.

You can try to belittle us but we have a mandate too and that has to be respected. If you want an Irish language act passed via devolution, then you need to accept things which you might not like. As I said it is called negotiations.

Havockk

A Little Pony wrote: »

This attitude of domination has never worked as seen from the past, so why are you just ignoring the debate of what is actually being discussed? Banging on about the future of the United Kingdom when the discussion in the last few pages is about the executive getting up and running again.

You can try to belittle us but we have a mandate too and that has to be respected. If you want an Irish language act passed via devolution, then you need to accept things which you might not like. As I said it is called negotiations.

The military covenant is quasi-fascist pap.

Thomas__

A Little Pony wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

steddyeddy wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Deary me, you still banging on about it. Deal with the here and now on this debate. You can't have it all your own way Steddy, you need to negotiate. If Sinn Fein want an act for Irish, then expect Unionists to put across our wishes.

They don't have to put anything across. It's not a tit for tat. The unionists aren't actually giving anything up by respecting another culture.

 You want equality one way. Unionists have wishes too as outlined, that is what negotiations are about.

There might be a prospect arising in which the wishes of the Unionist won´t be that relevant anymore in the near future and they´d be better advised to adopt to the present in order to gain the future in a UI. For among the various wishes on their side, the top of it is still to keep NI "British", as long as there is a UK existing. When that UK is thrown into history, things will change rapidly whether they like it or not. Where there is no UK anymore, all loyalty and reason to it will be gone.

This attitude of domination has never worked as seen from the past, so why are you just ignoring the debate of what is actually being discussed? Banging on about the future of the United Kingdom when the discussion in the last few pages is about the executive getting up and running again.

You can try to belittle us but we have a mandate too and that has to be respected. If you want an Irish language act passed via devolution, then you need to accept things which you might not like. As I said it is called negotiations.

In these days the Ulster Scots subject would be the very very last thing about which to worry I would even consider. Your whole future is at stake in regards of the whole economy, the subsidies NI annually receives from London, Jobs might be soon enough hang in the balance or get lost in due course of the Brexit and you have no better things to do than to throw in this random Ulster Scots issue to deflect from the real important things. Jesus Christ!

FrancieBrady

A Little Pony wrote: »

The covenant has been talked about for a good number of years now. Sinn Fein carried on being in government without a language act. Are you prepared to accept the military covenant for a language act?

Last point on this. A Military Covenant will not be entered into as long as that military have questions to answer in the jurisdiction. That was the position when it was first mooted and hasn't changed in the intervening years and Unionists were happy enough to govern. They have NEVER made an ultimatum based on it, why is it coming up now?

If it was a redline issue for Unionists then they should have made it one, instead of trying to pretend it is an issue now.

The DUP knew before the elections what the redline issues were, the people made their opinions known and the DUP have decided that they are still redline issues.

A Little Pony

Havockk wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

This attitude of domination has never worked as seen from the past, so why are you just ignoring the debate of what is actually being discussed? Banging on about the future of the United Kingdom when the discussion in the last few pages is about the executive getting up and running again.

You can try to belittle us but we have a mandate too and that has to be respected. If you want an Irish language act passed via devolution, then you need to accept things which you might not like. As I said it is called negotiations.

The military covenant is quasi-fascist pap.

The word fascism is wrongly placed here. Well to be fair, most people don't have a clue what it means these days. Everyone is a fascist now according to some.

A Little Pony

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The covenant has been talked about for a good number of years now. Sinn Fein carried on being in government without a language act. Are you prepared to accept the military covenant for a language act?

Last point on this. A Military Covenant will not be entered into as long as that military have questions to answer in the jurisdiction. That was the position when it was first mooted and hasn't changed in the intervening years and Unionists were happy enough to govern. They have NEVER made an ultimatum based on it, why is it coming up now?

If it was a redline issue for Unionists then they should have made it one, instead of trying to pretend it is an issue now.

The DUP knew before the elections what the redline issues were, the people made their opinions known and the DUP have decided that they are still redline issues.

I thought the past was supposed to be left in the past and moving forward? Legacy issues are again something which isn't a one way street. Are we not supposed to just draw a line under this and move on?

Havockk

A Little Pony wrote: »

The word fascism is wrongly placed here. Well to be fair, most people don't have a clue what it means these days. Everyone is a fascist now according to some.

It's certainly not. Soldiers (who volunteer) to get preferential treatment in the NHS? or have the NHS criticized for having the temerity to treat wounded soldiers in the same wards as civilians? Skip waiting lists, no prescription charges?

That's a tiered system which is militaristic and fascistic in anyones language.

Fratton Fred

Thomas__ wrote: »

Because the Brits are still suffering from a mental fall back into imperial times and think that it is right to let their ugly imperialism is rearing his head once again, to please Mr Farage and his hard way Brexiteers.

such a shame, I had high hopes for you.

Now I see you are just another one of them.

Havockk

Fratton Fred wrote: »

such a shame, I had high hopes for you.

Now I see you are just another one of them.

Grayson

Apparently up to 40% of the UK games industry are considering relocating too. That's an industry we could poach a lot of.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/30/uk-games-companies-leaving-brexit-vote-eu-workers

FrancieBrady

A Little Pony wrote: »

I thought the past was supposed to be left in the past and moving forward? Legacy issues are again something which isn't a one way street. Are we not supposed to just draw a line under this and move on?

No we are not. Everyone is supposed to want the truth. Which is why a Truth commission has been suggested and called for. We know who doesn't want that, don't we? The DUP harp on enough about 'truth' when it comes to one side though, where are their statements calling for everybody to reveal what they know?

FrancieBrady

Grayson wrote: »

Apparently up to 40% of the UK games industry are considering relocating too. That's an industry we could poach a lot of.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/30/uk-games-companies-leaving-brexit-vote-eu-workers

Brexit is creating waves in almost every industry.

http://iftn.ie/news/?act1=record&only=1&aid=73&rid=4290423&tpl=archnews&force=1

A Little Pony

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

I thought the past was supposed to be left in the past and moving forward? Legacy issues are again something which isn't a one way street. Are we not supposed to just draw a line under this and move on?

No we are not. Everyone is supposed to want the truth. Which is why a Truth commission has been suggested and called for. We know who doesn't want that, don't we? The DUP harp on enough about 'truth' when it comes to one side though, where are their statements calling for everybody to reveal what they know?

Can't work with a party when half of them are in court for crimes against humanity. Lets just move on mate.

FrancieBrady

A Little Pony wrote: »

Can't work with a party when half of them are in court for crimes against humanity. Lets just move on mate.

Everybody wants to 'move on' when the spotlight shines too brightly on their failings :rolleyes:.

Thomas__

Grayson wrote: »

Apparently up to 40% of the UK games industry are considering relocating too. That's an industry we could poach a lot of.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/30/uk-games-companies-leaving-brexit-vote-eu-workers

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Grayson wrote: »

Apparently up to 40% of the UK games industry are considering relocating too. That's an industry we could poach a lot of.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/30/uk-games-companies-leaving-brexit-vote-eu-workers

Brexit is creating waves in almost every industry.

http://iftn.ie/news/?act1=record&only=1&aid=73&rid=4290423&tpl=archnews&force=1

This might just be the start of it with many to follow, now that article 50 has been triggered. It is a clear sign that they don´t trust Mrs May and her talk of her promised (Brexit) land. It might all backfire on her sooner than she even thinks which might as well weaken her negotiating Position when many companyies are just "jumping ship" and move to other EU countries. Well, that´s not what the Brexiteers had thought, isn´t it?

A Little Pony

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Can't work with a party when half of them are in court for crimes against humanity. Lets just move on mate.

Everybody wants to 'move on' when the spotlight shines too brightly on their failings :rolleyes:.

So you think we should know about Gerry Adams membership of the PIRA and his war crimes officially? Why rock the boat when its not needed.

FrancieBrady

Thomas__ wrote: »

This might just be the start of it with many to follow, now that article 50 has been triggered. It is a clear sign that they don´t trust Mrs May and her talk of her promised (Brexit) land. It might all backfire on her sooner than she even thinks which might as well weaken her negotiating Position when many companyies are just "jumping ship" and move to other EU countries. Well, that´s not what the Brexiteers had thought, isn´t it?

It could be death by many small knives instead of big ones.

Thomas__

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

This might just be the start of it with many to follow, now that article 50 has been triggered. It is a clear sign that they don´t trust Mrs May and her talk of her promised (Brexit) land. It might all backfire on her sooner than she even thinks which might as well weaken her negotiating Position when many companyies are just "jumping ship" and move to other EU countries. Well, that´s not what the Brexiteers had thought, isn´t it?

It could be death by many small knives instead of big ones.

Looks like it.

Thomas__

Some very good article by Mrs Sturgeon, plain and straight to the point:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/29/theresa-may-scotland-prime-minister-brexit

Junkyard Tom

LordSutch wrote: »

the two parts if this island

Ireland doesn't have 'two parts'.

Grayson

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Ireland doesn't have 'two parts'.

To be fair, the north is even a different shade of green in that photo

dinorebel

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Ireland doesn't have 'two parts'.

Geographically you're right put politically it does whatever the rights and wrongs of that fact.

dinorebel

Grayson wrote: »

To be fair, the north is even a different shade of green in that photo

Rare you can see Donegal we usually have a fu*king great cloud over us.

conorhal

Thomas__ wrote: »

Some very good article by Mrs Sturgeon, plain and straight to the point:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/29/theresa-may-scotland-prime-minister-brexit

One of the most laugh out loud comments I heard all year:


"there are 100 billion nerves in the human body, and Nicola Sturgeon gets on every last one of them...." :pac:

FrancieBrady

conorhal wrote: »

One of the most laugh out loud comments I heard all year:


"there are 100 billion nerves in the human body, and Nicola Sturgeon gets on every last one of them...." :pac:

If the choice into the future was listening to either Boris, Farage, May or Sturgeon, I know which one I'd be choosing.

:pac:

https://twitter.com/WTFisGoingOnDon/status/847463490985930753

Depp

Seeing a lot of people calling for independence refs in Northern Ireland/Scotland at the minute, one thing I was thinking about this aren't they both operating at a 10bn+ (approx) deficit in regards to money they pay into the UK exchequer vs what they take out to pay for public services etc., Personally I think they should be given the chance to vote but would they be able to handle independence without huge bailouts/massive increases in national debt? Just one angle I haven't seen talked about much that I find quite interesting.

A Little Pony

Depp wrote: »

Seeing a lot of people calling for independence refs in Northern Ireland/Scotland at the minute, one thing I was thinking about this aren't they both operating at a 10bn+ (approx) deficit in regards to money they pay into the UK exchequer vs what they take out to pay for public services etc., Personally I think they should be given the chance to vote but would they be able to handle independence without huge bailouts/massive increases in national debt? Just one angle I haven't seen talked about much that I find quite interesting.

No. And it is isn't a big topic here in Ulster, its hardly on everyone's lips or anything of the sort.

RobertKK

Financial Times in London has an article about Dublin set to face a building boom, and will it be different this time, as Dublin could be set to become the most appealing financial centre in Europe depending on passporting rights for the UK to offer their services into the EU.

https://www.ft.com/content/961d7ce2-0b0d-11e7-ac5a-903b21361b43

Dublin is on the brink of another building boom. Over the next five years, says Savills Ireland, the city plans to add 136 new office buildings — totalling over 12m sq ft.



An August survey by PwC placed Dublin second behind London among Europe’s most appealing financial centres. According to the report’s authors, London need only lose its passporting rights — the process by which financial firms based in one EU country can sell their wares freely into all the others — and Dublin would beat the UK capital to the number one spot.

The full article is very interesting as it says a major housing construction plan is needed for Dublin to house all the extra workers.


The City (the financial hub) in London generates £70 billion for the UK every year.

Depp

A Little Pony wrote: »

No. And it is isn't a big topic here in Ulster, its hardly on everyone's lips or anything of the sort.

No as in NI wouldnt be able to support itself or? Again not trying to suggest it on everyones lips in the north and my question was mainly about scotland but its something I have heard mentioned several times by remain supporters from the north, just think its an interesting question everyone seems to be glossing over is all!

Unpossible

RobertKK wrote: »

Financial Times in London has an article about Dublin set to face a building boom, and will it be different this time, as Dublin could be set to become the most appealing financial centre in Europe depending on passporting rights for the UK to offer their services into the EU.

The full article is very interesting as it says a major housing construction plan is needed for Dublin to house all the extra workers.

The City (the financial hub) in London generates £70 billion for the UK every year.

I can't read the article (no subscription), but I think the premise is wishful thinking unless they have contacts in the banks telling them this. Even if a bunch of buildings were commissioned to be built here how fast could we actually build them? How fast can we build houses & infrastructure?

More importantly, I would imagine other european financial centers are gunning for that business too. Realistically there probably won't be a city replacing London, just a number of cities taking bits of its business. I think the passporting rights are as good as gone, its worth too much to the rest of us if we can get some of that business.

A Dub in Glasgo

Depp wrote: »

Seeing a lot of people calling for independence refs in Northern Ireland/Scotland at the minute, one thing I was thinking about this aren't they both operating at a 10bn+ (approx) deficit in regards to money they pay into the UK exchequer vs what they take out to pay for public services etc., Personally I think they should be given the chance to vote but would they be able to handle independence without huge bailouts/massive increases in national debt? Just one angle I haven't seen talked about much that I find quite interesting.

That is UK deficit 'allocated' by the UK government. Neither Scotland or NI has a deficit as they are in a union

Depp

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

That is UK deficit 'allocated' by the UK government. Neither Scotland or NI has a deficit as they are in a union

By ''Uk Deficit allocated'' do you mean the difference between funds contributed by them to the exchequer and funds allocated to them by the uk govt for public spending as thats what I meant by deficit, not a deficiti as in what we might have here or in other single state countries. my question was whether they could survive the loss of UK money without a spiralling national debt.

A Dub in Glasgo

Depp wrote: »

By ''Uk Deficit allocated'' do you mean the difference between funds contributed by them to the exchequer and funds allocated to them by the uk govt for public spending as thats what I meant by deficit, not a deficiti as in what we might have here or in other single state countries. my question was whether they could survive the loss of UK money without a spiralling national debt.

I do not believe the figures used for 'within the UK revenue & spend' which is what you are using can be cross applied to an independent country

Brexit Through The Gift Shop (No name calling) 730 days to go

Someone needs to update that number 769 now. :pac:

Depp

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I do not believe the figures used for 'within the UK revenue & spend' which is what you are using can be cross applied to an independent country

Well all I'm saying, is going on figures released last august, scotland pays £15bn less into the exchequer than the exchequer spends on scotland, this is the extent of my knowledge on the issue, if they do get independence will this deficit just go away? How do you feel the figures are inaccurate? Not saying I know the answer or that you don't or anything, just interested

oppenheimer1

Depp wrote: »

Well all I'm saying, is going on figures released last august, scotland pays £15bn less into the exchequer than the exchequer spends on scotland, if they do get independence will this deficit just go away? How do you feel the figures are inaccurate? Not saying I know the answer or that you don't or anything, just interested

It is a key issue for the Scottish independence argument to be fair. That said the Barnett formula is likely to come under pressure if Brexit tips the UK into recession, and cutting it will likely increase the clamour for independence even more.

Jaggo

Depp wrote: »

Well all I'm saying, is going on figures released last august, scotland pays £15bn less into the exchequer than the exchequer spends on scotland, if they do get independence will this deficit just go away? How do you feel the figures are inaccurate? Not saying I know the answer or that you don't or anything, just interested

Its one of those things that are very hard to calculate. You are right, both countries have large deficits with the UK but in Scotland's case things become more complicated with oil and corporation tax of large companies.

Tescos etc. will be lodging its taxes on profits and sales made in Scotland in England where its HQ is domiciled. Same with BP and other big companies, artificially pushing Scottish tax down, and then of course, there is Royal Bank of Scotland and its massive losses hitting the english books (it pays its tax in London) rather then being paid for by Edinburgh.

From everything I have read on the matter, as it stands, Scotland would be running a deficit, probably not as high as some say, but still a deficit.

The price of oil is the big question, with the North Sea taxation being dependent on profits a high oil price is required, (and a new recent discovery of a billion barrels), Scotland may be well be able to run a large surplus.

The real key question though is if Scotland can spend its (less) resources in a manner that improves the welfare of its people better than the Westminster government.

FrancieBrady

Depp wrote: »

Well all I'm saying, is going on figures released last august, scotland pays £15bn less into the exchequer than the exchequer spends on scotland, this is the extent of my knowledge on the issue, if they do get independence will this deficit just go away? How do you feel the figures are inaccurate? Not saying I know the answer or that you don't or anything, just interested

The 'figures' are untested, certainly as far as I am aware in relation to NI. There would have to be a root and branch look at the figures and the cost of running a united Ireland before anyone can claim to know definitively what it would cost.

Depp

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The 'figures' are untested, certainly as far as I am aware in relation to NI. There would have to be a root and branch look at the figures and the cost of running a united Ireland before anyone can claim to know definitively what it would cost.

What do you mean by untested?

A Dub in Glasgo

Jaggo wrote: »

Its one of those things that are very hard to calculate. You are right, both countries have large deficits with the UK but in Scotland's case things become more complicated with oil and corporation tax of large companies.

Tescos etc. will be lodging its taxes on profits and sales made in Scotland in England where its HQ is domiciled. Same with BP other big companies, artificially pushing Scottish tax down, and of course Royal Bank of Scotland, and its massive losses are hitting the english books (pays its tax in London) rather then being paid for by Edinburgh.

From everything I have read on the matter, as it stands, Scotland would be running a deficit, probably not as high as some say, but still a deficit.

The price of oil is the big question, with the North Sea taxation being dependent on profits a high oil price is required, (and a new recent discovery of a billion barrels), Scotland may be well be able to run a large surplus.

The real key question though is if Scotland can spend its (less) resources in a manner that improves the welfare of its people better than the Westminster government.

Good summary, just to add that almost every country in the world (and households for that matter) run a deficit. There is one country that has similar size to Scotland to the north and similar oil reserves found which probably does not. The big difference is that they saved into a 'rainy day' fund since striking the back stuff. Compare and contrast with the UK who have spent it all

FrancieBrady

Depp wrote: »

What do you mean by untested?

Nobody knows the precise breakdown.

Christy42

Depp wrote: »

Well all I'm saying, is going on figures released last august, scotland pays £15bn less into the exchequer than the exchequer spends on scotland, this is the extent of my knowledge on the issue, if they do get independence will this deficit just go away? How do you feel the figures are inaccurate? Not saying I know the answer or that you don't or anything, just interested

Ah yeah but those are just figures from experts and people attempting to create fear. Plus it is about national sovereignty and not the economy. Plus it is short term pain economically for long term gain. I think that covers most of the Brexit arguments:p.

Seriously though I expect both deficits to come down anyway as the UK gets forced to cut services. Realistically both are in for tough time no matter what they do. Overall they seem like bad ideas but if they could work their into the EU some time maybe it would be best of a bad lot.

FrancieBrady

Was just doing my rounds there tonight which takes me over and back across the border with Fermanagh. Heard two things that were interesting.
First one was that there is a team of men carrying out site survey work on the roads. They arrive in Dublin registered vans and are taking levels, etc on or near where the old frontier posts were.
May just be a 'be prepared' scenario, but I just thought it was interesting.

The other thing I heard is that two lots of land were sold for really good prices in the last two weeks, to two of the biggest farmers in Fermanagh. One lot wasn't even for sale and the owner was approached to sell. These farmers had not previously had land in the south.
One wonders what was going on there.

R P McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Was just doing my rounds there tonight which takes me over and back across the border with Fermanagh. Heard two things that were interesting.
First one was that there is a team of men carrying out site survey work on the roads. They arrive in Dublin registered vans and are taking levels, etc on or near where the old frontier posts were.
May just be a 'be prepared' scenario, but I just thought it was interesting.

The other thing I heard is that two lots of land were sold for really good prices in the last two weeks, to two of the biggest farmers in Fermanagh. One lot wasn't even for sale and the owner was approached to sell. These farmers had not previously had land in the south.
One wonders what was going on there.

Serious amount of customs checkpoints along the border over the last number of months as well. Must be on preparatory mode

Junkyard Tom

Grayson wrote: »

To be fair, the north is even a different shade of green in that photo

The Dublin area looks a little pale too.

FrancieBrady

R P McMurphy wrote: »

Serious amount of customs checkpoints along the border over the last number of months as well. Must be on preparatory mode

I think I'll start calling Brexit the Smugglers Charter.

4068ac1elhodqr

Deleted User wrote: »

Someone needs to update that number 769 now. :pac:

Didn't the chap whom wrote A50 say on the TV box (Sky/BBC), that he thinks it could take up to 8yrs.
So maybe 2,920 days is more accurate.

Could be a long messy divorce.
Unless they're quickly offered the cat, the dog and the big tv from the good room to stop them upsetting the euro neighbors, and giving them ideas of their own.

Capt'n Midnight

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What are they going to do? Nuke the EU?

The French have nukes too.

Grayson wrote: »

Good luck getting a Trident to fire.

Besides, the scots might keep them is Faslane after it leaves the union

Back in the day the boomers were serviced from a ship so strictly speaking the base could be anywhere. IIRC they not get the missiles and stuff done in the US of A.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Proteus_(AS-19)#1960.E2.80.931992
Or they could do it like the treaty ports we used to have, the biggest issue would be how long the transition was and how much rent would be paid.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No, but they could easily scale back on NATO operations. There is no reason why they should be sending ship after ship to the Med, but they do.

One of the reason they do is to stop Migrants on their way to Calais.

We've been sending ships to the Med too.

We also gave one to Malta.