Brexit discussion thread IV

Folkstonian

Anthracite wrote: »

Folkstonian wrote: »

England alone would still command enough hard and soft power to be an impactful player on the world stage.

England is heading towards South Korea levels of hard and soft power. As Brexiteers so gleefully point out, Europe is shrinking as a percentage of the global economy (and population). England and Wales will be nothing more than a historical footnote on the world stage within a century. What do you know of the Khmer Empire? Isn't it funny how such a small and currently insignificant part of the world used to hold such sway?

Of course, the Brexiteers will then point to their nukes and their seat on (what they will tell you on a different day is) the completely irrelevant UN Security Council. What do they plan to do with the nukes? What use are they, exactly?

The U.K. was ranked top of the ‘Soft Power 30’ in 2018, beating France, Germany, and the United States. Its simply a falsehood to suggest an equivalence with South Korea (fascinating place though it is!) regardless of our current plight.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not someone who is in any way interested in going down the ‘my country is better than yours’ route - I find that kind of mindset wholly counter productive and juvenile. But I dont see the point in baseless nonsense either.

Who knows anyway, in a hundred years time Britain may well be the leading voice in the EU, using its clout for the benefit of itself and it’s neighbours.

Mezcita

Folkstonian wrote: »

Who knows anyway, in a hundred years time Britain may well be the leading voice in the EU, using its clout for the benefit of itself and it’s neighbours.

History would suggest otherwise.

Calina

In a hundred years' time we will all be dead. It does not matter. For most people what matters is what happens in the more immediate future.

The question you have to ask is whether the UK can retain its soft power. The evidence at the moment is uncertain. I would argue that that having Boris Johnson as SecStateFA won't have helped and general govt behaviour has been sonewhat undiplomatic.

Additionally, the ability of the UK depends on recognising a significant amount of work is done by unelected civil servants. The demonisation of Olly Robbins and Sir Ivan Rogers does not suggest that this recognition can be relied on.

Hurrache

A bit of confusion at the moment as to if the UK were told that the Chequers proposal is dead.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1037356417836113925
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1037358898880098305

trellheim

The question you have to ask is whether the UK can retain its soft power. The evidence at the moment is uncertain. I would argue that that having Boris Johnson as SecStateFA won't have helped and general govt behaviour has been sonewhat undiplomatic.

Additionally, the ability of the UK depends on recognising a significant amount of work is done by unelected civil servants. The demonisation of Olly Robbins and Sir Ivan Rogers does not suggest that this recognition can be relied on.

...lol understatement.

It should be noted that it was Ivan Rogers who was demonised because Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill didnt like the correctly pessimistic view coming back from the EU

Olly is still sherpaing away for TM , his complete absence from anything from him is singularly telling these last few months.

demfad

Folkstonian wrote: »

It was wholly pointless putting it into law anyway seeing as, if it wanted to, parliament can just amend or repeal it.

It was more a show of defiance against the type of Brexit hardliners perceived May to be dragging them towards than a demonstration of unity with Northern Ireland. I can’t imagine the likes of Rees-Mogg and Redwood spent a whole lot of time thinking about NI before Brexit appeared on the horizon. It’s all just a slow but deliberate discrediting of the PM.

Just to clarity: There was two amendments.
1: No hard border on the Island of Ireland
2: No Customs border in the Irish sea

If there is a no-deal situation then option 1 will have to be repealed.
The UK in this situation must have an external border in Ireland to check Country of Origin, apply tarrifs and quotas. If it doesn't it plunges into a situation where it does not receive favourable WTO rates from other countries. So maximum tariffs on all products.

The Commons would have to vote on this which would bring them face to face with the calamatous choice. That's hopeful and the addition of this amendment might be smart strategy.


I will say the following knowing that some people might consider it a conspiracy theory.

Russia has a massive interest in Brexit (max hardness) being followed through.
I won't go into it here but they have interfered in your democracy in a way which will become clearer (hopefully) in time.
The Russians hacked loads of cyber weapons and cyber nasties from the NSA a few years ago. One of Russia's test attacks in Ukraine (NotPetya) took out a fifth of the world's commercial marine fleet and it was only supposed to target a Ukraine Govt department.
If the UK exits with no-deal it is an historically vulnerable position not just in terms of trade but in terms of security. In the chaos of a no deal how long would UK systems last if they were hit with a major cyber attack?

We are actually in the midst of the first world information and cyber war. It beggars belief that this has not being discussed amongst the no deal talk.

J Mysterio

Folkstonian wrote: »

Gibraltar is not part of the U.K. and never has been. There is also absolutely no appetite among the people there to become a part of Spain, regardless of Brexit.

Obviously they would prefer, as I would, for a second vote on the matter but hundreds of years of Spanish aggression hostility them has not weakened their resolve to remain a British Overseas Territory.

I know its not actually part of the UK as a political entity, I meant 'part of the UK' as in their dominion, but lets use the correct term then: British Overseas Territory.

It's ludicrous that this a BOT anyhow, surrounded as it is by Spain and within what most people would consider to be 'Spain'. A strange place. Strange in the same way the Malvinas is strange and strange in the same way that Unionist in NI are strange. All dysfunctional remnants of the British Empire.

Folkstonian wrote: »

The British Empire ended, in most people’s eyes, in 1997 when control Hong Kong was ceded to the Chinese.

I'll grant you that most people do believe that, and that is a fair position to take, but of course most people would never have imagined the decline could continue further and this now looks likely to result in the break up of the UK and GB.

Folkstonian wrote: »

The commonwealth is growing in size, not contracting. It’s future as a forum for governments to discuss matters of trade, democracy and development etc actually looks quite healthy.

Debatable. I don't see British Foreign policy making much inroads globally.

Folkstonian wrote: »

Scottish independence and/ or Irish unity would not signal the ‘endpoint of a Civilization’. England alone would still command enough hard and soft power to be an impactful player on the world stage.

You are twisting my words. I said 'all great civilizations rise and fall'. As previously mentioned, I see the madness that is Brexit as a continuation of what is the fall of the British Empire. i.e. it did not end with Hong Kong.

Folkstonian wrote: »

I don’t like Brexit. I wish it wasn’t happening. I still remain hopeful it can be reversed or at least achieved in a softer and more sensible manner than May is currently gunning for.

We can agree on this point.

Folkstonian wrote: »

I love this thread, though I don’t post much, because it allows me a really interesting window into what people over here make of things, which is often wholly different to what people at home think.

Indeed.

Folkstonian wrote: »

But your posts, so often, are of a tabloidesque and hyperbolic nature, as if you were pulling yourself off the whole time at the thought of Britain’s current hardships

I've been banned for less. If you have been following the thread you will note that I have said several times that the Brexit vote was a huge shock and dissapointment to me and I take no joy in it.

I have been continuosly stunned by how your countrymen and ruling class have approached this issue and how they have behaved throughout. Wreckless and arrogant would be one way to put it.

You say I am hypberbolic and tabloidesque. I say that the situation we find ourselves in is grotesque, unprecedented, bizarre and unbelievable. Perhaps I can get a little taken from time to time with some mad development or other, there has been no shortage of them and there is more to come. I generally post quite instinctively and It can be hard sometimes to find the right language to express oneself in the face of what we are witnessing but anyway, I find your synopsis a little uncharitable.

Perhaps I hit a nerve, the truth can hurt.

Maybe if you contributed more instead of lurking you could provide some balance and insight, but actually, your contrubution was to essentially call me a wanķer, so bravo.

flutered

J Mysterio wrote: »

Just had an aul google to see what Newspaper Gibraltar might have - the Gibraltar Chronicle. Article from them on this issue here:

http://chronicle.gi/2018/07/too-soon-to-tell-if-spain-will-seek-to-block-gibraltar-from-brexit-transition-borrell-says/

It seems the current Spanish Foreign Minister is not quite so hardline as the previous incumbent and they will not 'use Brexit to push for sovereignty over Gibraltar'.

to use an irish political quote, he is letting the hare sit

flutered

Folkstonian wrote: »

Gibraltar is not part of the U.K. and never has been. There is also absolutely no appetite among the people there to become a part of Spain, regardless of Brexit.

Obviously they would prefer, as I would, for a second vote on the matter but hundreds of years of Spanish aggression hostility them has not weakened their resolve to remain a British Overseas Territory.

The British Empire ended, in most people’s eyes, in 1997 when control Hong Kong was ceded to the Chinese.

The commonwealth is growing in size, not contracting. It’s future as a forum for governments to discuss matters of trade, democracy and development etc actually looks quite healthy.

Scottish independence and/ or Irish unity would not signal the ‘endpoint of a Civilization’. England alone would still command enough hard and soft power to be an impactful player on the world stage.

I don’t like Brexit. I wish it wasn’t happening. I still remain hopeful it can be reversed or at least achieved in a softer and more sensible manner than May is currently gunning for.

I love this thread, though I don’t post much, because it allows me a really interesting window into what people over here make of things, which is often wholly different to what people at home think.

But your posts, so often, are of a tabloidesque and hyperbolic nature, as if you were pulling yourself off the whole time at the thought of Britain’s current hardships

the uk;s hard/soft power went out the window while johnston was in the f.o.

flutered

Anthracite wrote: »

England is heading towards South Korea levels of hard and soft power. As Brexiteers so gleefully point out, Europe is shrinking as a percentage of the global economy (and population). England and Wales will be nothing more than a historical footnote on the world stage within a century. What do you know of the Khmer Empire? Isn't it funny how such a small and currently insignificant part of the world used to hold such sway?

Of course, the Brexiteers will then point to their nukes and their seat on (what they will tell you on a different day is) the completely irrelevant UN Security Council. What do they plan to do with the nukes? What use are they, exactly?

their nukes require the blessing of the u.s. to use, they are a financial millstone

Havockk

flutered wrote: »

their nukes require the blessing of the u.s. to use, they are a financial millstone

Sure they can't even get them to fire in the right direction in any case. How many trillion has been squandered on trident by this stage.

Dymo

Folkstonian wrote: »

But your posts, so often, are of a tabloidesque and hyperbolic nature, as if you were pulling yourself off the whole time at the thought of Britain’s current hardships

I think that a fair breviloquent summary to some of this thread.

Junkyard Tom

Folkstonian wrote: »

Who knows anyway, in a hundred years time Britain may well be the leading voice in the EU, using its clout for the benefit of itself and it’s neighbours.

The way things are going 'Britain' will be long gone as a political entity in a hundred years time - it may not survive the next decade. As for 'soft power', doesn't 'soft power' include cultural stuff like pop music?

I'm sure Ed Sheeran will do a wonderful job of bringing Britain's 'clout' to bear because, goodness knows, he could do a much better job than the shower of utter clowns you have running the show over there at the moment.

Enzokk

Some interesting articles and tweets regarding Brexit and everything around it. Here we have one of a few about recent polling and surveys that are floating around. This one states that only about 20% of the public believes a good deal will be negotiated for the UK. It also states states as others have before that 12% of Brexit voters would vote Remain in a new referendum and 6% of Remain voters would change their mind.

The survey found that just 81 per cent of 2016 Leave voters would back Brexit now, with 12 per cent saying they had switched to Remain. By contrast, just 6 per cent of Remain voters have changed sides, with 90 per cent sticking by their original decision.

Among those who did not vote in 2016, almost half (49 per cent) said they would now vote against Brexit, compared to 23 per cent who would back Leave in a second referendum.

Theresa May under fire as less than one in five now expect a good Brexit deal for Britain, damning survey finds


Here is an outlook if only 18-24 year olds were allowed to vote in the next general election. No surprise really as I believe there is research out there that found that people become more conservative as they get older. I bet there will be a fair few of these voters who would turn against Labour if they don't support staying in the EU, which incidentally is about the same percentage that would vote for them as per this poll.

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1036900674573934592

Here is an article on how the two different sides have been dealing with those people caught in the middle of it all, EU citizens in the UK and British citizens in the EU.

The 'faceless bureaucrats' of Brussels stood up for our rights while England's defenders of liberty hung us out to dry

My personal fight started after I was rejected for permanent residence and discovered the truly unfair rules surrounding it. I joined the campaign group the3million to fight for the rights of all EU citizens living in the UK, not just those who had five P60s up their sleeve.

In February 2017 we wrote a letter about our Brexit worries and sent it to the three Brussels institutions and David Davis. We never got a reply from the then-Brexit secretary. However, within a fortnight of our letter, Michel Barnier wrote back to us, inviting us to a meeting on March 28th 2017, the day before Article 50 was triggered.

By this time we had established links with our friends 'British in Europe', as we realised our issues were symmetrical with theirs. We were all in the same boat. We asked Barnier if he would agree to meet us together, which he duly did.

Here is how some of the requests they made to the UK to get some clarity, or at least just have them listen to the concerns of those involved were handled.

The following day the3million wrote to Theresa May asking for a meeting. This was answered on her behalf over a month later, explaining how the upcoming general election meant that the PM was unable to commit to a meeting, and would we please write to her again after the election.

We did so and finally received a reply from Mrs May in late July, thanking us for our engagement and suggesting we continue to keep in touch with the Home Office. There was no offer of a meeting.

Since then, the3million and British in Europe have continued to request meetings with Theresa May, Davis and new Brexit secretary Dominic Raab – through letters, Twitter or roundabout means using hopeful contacts within the Conservative Party. Nothing worked. We would have contact with Home Office officials after negotiation rounds, but never from those in charge of negotiations, who needed to hear and understand our concerns.

It's particularly baffling in the case of British in Europe. They represent the citizens whose rights were supposedly May's primary concern.

All we got from May, in the end, were two open letters, dated October 19th 2017 (as she was travelling to an EU council meeting) and December 11th 2017 (just before another EU council meeting) which were full of warm words but did not contain any substance.

Since that first Brussels meeting, the3million and British in Europe have jointly had multiple meetings with Barnier, his number two Sabine Weyand, and their Article 50 team at the Commission. We've also had meetings at the Council and the European parliament.

It goes on to state that Dominic Raab replied that they shouldn't worry as a solution was reached in December 2017 and their rights had been secured already. The question though is what happens in the event of a no-deal scenario, which has not been answered.

Then just for some head scratching, after the UK has now released photos and identities for those they believe were responsible for the death of one of their citizens and the attempted murder on UK soil, there is a lot of reference to working with the EU and working within EU structures to ensure that there is an appropriate response against Russia. Now I understand that the UK has to work through the EU, but it is a little ironic that they will need the European Arrest Warrant and EU sanctions against Russia. What do they think will happen after Brexit though?

Salisbury Novichok poisoning: Russian nationals named as suspects

But a European Arrest Warrant has been obtained in case they travel to the EU.

Mrs May also said Britain would push for the EU to agree new sanctions against Russia.

Lemming

Enzokk wrote: »

Here is an outlook if only 18-24 year olds were allowed to vote in the next general election. No surprise really as I believe there is research out there that found that people become more conservative as they get older. I bet there will be a fair few of these voters who would turn against Labour if they don't support staying in the EU, which incidentally is about the same percentage that would vote for them as per this poll.

Bold is my emphasis.

See "Nick Clegg". The same fate awaits Corbyn & Labour if they continue their current course.

J Mysterio

Dreadful performance by May in PMQ's today. She became increasingly shrill under Corbyn's questioning. Plenty of soundbites like 'we will make a success of Brexit', but very little substance. Various MP's stated that Chequers was dead ("dead as a dodo").

At one point Corbyn says that 'no deal is not better than a bad deal, no deal is a bad deal', to which May replies 'The Director of the WTO says it won't be the end of the world'. How inspiring, something you can really get behind.

May has to drop Chequers for progress but i'm not sure she can find it within herself to move significantly from it, or her red lines, for agreement to be found. Chequers was never a goer, literally anybody could or should have seen this. It would be quite a climbdown for her now: she has already - foolishly - staked so much on it, including seeing off Davis and Johnson. It's notable that she says 'I'm going to make a success of Brexit' several times rather than 'we', which i'm sure she used to say before.

She is quite manic in her opposition to a second referendum. I suppose they dont want to normalize these with respect to what referendums may well be down the line.

Nody

J Mysterio wrote: »

May has to drop Chequers for progress but i'm not sure she can find it within herself to move significantly from it, or her red lines, for agreement to be found. It would be quite a climbdown: she has already - foolishly - staked so much on it, including seeing off Davis and Johnson. But Chequers was never a goer, literally anybody could or should have seen this.

The problem is not the climb down; the problem is there's nothing else to replace it with to keep the Tories at least partially coherent. Chequers was never about getting a deal with EU in reality; it was about trying to get the Tories to finally unite around an EU position to keep the party together (and May in power).

Capt'n Midnight

Havockk wrote: »

Sure they can't even get them to fire in the right direction in any case. How many trillion has been squandered on trident by this stage.

Don't worry the UK's own GPS system will be up and running soon. :pac:




Lifetime cost of replacing Trident will be about £205Bn

Or about £6.8Bn a year over 30 years, comparable to EU costs , especially whey you consider the drop in Sterling and economic slowdown won't make subs cheaper but it will reduce the EU costs.


Unlike the French they don't have another delivery system.

And there's been a lot of science satellites launched recently that use lasers to map altitude. Detecting the 5cm uplift in sea level when a sub passes by has been trivial for the military sats for quite a while now. It's got to the stage where the big Russian subs hide under the ice for months.

It's not clear that the subs still guarantee taking out most of Moscow nevermind being value for money.

Folkstonian

Trident doesn’t use satellites for targeting, American or otherwise. It locks onto the stars for guidance. It doesn’t require American authorisation for launch either. God forbid it ever came to that, of course.

Folkstonian

Lemming wrote: »

Enzokk wrote: »

Here is an outlook if only 18-24 year olds were allowed to vote in the next general election. No surprise really as I believe there is research out there that found that people become more conservative as they get older. I bet there will be a fair few of these voters who would turn against Labour if they don't support staying in the EU, which incidentally is about the same percentage that would vote for them as per this poll.

Bold is my emphasis.

See "Nick Clegg". The same fate awaits Corbyn & Labour if they continue their current course.

I don’t see that same fate for Corbyn, as uniquely inept as he is. His followers would happily sacrifice Britain’s place in the EU, along with prosperity, safety and security, international cooperation with longstanding allies etc simply to see Jeremy in number ten.

As obviously charismatic as Clegg was (so the polar opposite to Corbyn) and as much faith as young people had, he never achieved the same cult like status

Capt'n Midnight

Folkstonian wrote: »

Trident doesn’t use satellites for targeting, American or otherwise. It locks onto the stars for guidance. It doesn’t require American authorisation for launch either. God forbid it ever came to that, of course.

Care to comment on the time when HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant collided and took out the on-patrol missile subs of both countries ?
The only "what if" in the argument about 4 vs. 5 subs is "what if it happens again?"

It's a lot of money for a country that that doesn't have a magic money tree.



Without the safety net of the European Courts and EU laws the Tories can run roughshod over stuff like zero hour contracts and working time and all sorts of workers rights.

Enzokk

Folkstonian wrote: »

I don’t see that same fate for Corbyn, as uniquely inept as he is. His followers would happily sacrifice Britain’s place in the EU, along with prosperity, safety and security, international cooperation with longstanding allies etc simply to see Jeremy in number ten.

As obviously charismatic as Clegg was (so the polar opposite to Corbyn) and as much faith as young people had, he never achieved the same cult like status

I don't think so. Yes he has followers that behave very much like a cult, yet I think a lot of his support are those that are disenfranchised by the current policies and what they see was taken away from them. They want what we all want, a hopeful future and not one mired in austerity and they want the freedom to travel and work around Europe like their parents had. At the moment Theresa May is taking this away from them. If Corbyn gets in power and does the same then they will turn on him as well. He will still have his cult following him but he will have lost a lot of his support.

flatty

Folkstonian wrote: »

Lemming wrote: »

Enzokk wrote: »

Here is an outlook if only 18-24 year olds were allowed to vote in the next general election. No surprise really as I believe there is research out there that found that people become more conservative as they get older. I bet there will be a fair few of these voters who would turn against Labour if they don't support staying in the EU, which incidentally is about the same percentage that would vote for them as per this poll.

Bold is my emphasis.

See "Nick Clegg". The same fate awaits Corbyn & Labour if they continue their current course.

I don’t see that same fate for Corbyn, as uniquely inept as he is. His followers would happily sacrifice Britain’s place in the EU, along with prosperity, safety and security, international cooperation with longstanding allies etc simply to see Jeremy in number ten.

As obviously charismatic as Clegg was (so the polar opposite to Corbyn) and as much faith as young people had, he never achieved the same cult like status

Same exactly could be said of the pm and her rivals.
None of them give a sh1te about the country really. Just power and/or personal profit.

Capt'n Midnight

Another poll - Scotland

http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/scotland-independence-brexit

47% vs 43%
- the number who'd vote for independence if UK leaves EU
- the number who'd vote to stay in UK if UK stays in EU


This is just insane. It's like Partition all over again.
If they shed Scotland then the Tory party could win a majority in England and Wales for another generation.

Lemming

Folkstonian wrote: »

I don’t see that same fate for Corbyn, as uniquely inept as he is. His followers would happily sacrifice Britain’s place in the EU, along with prosperity, safety and security, international cooperation with longstanding allies etc simply to see Jeremy in number ten.

As obviously charismatic as Clegg was (so the polar opposite to Corbyn) and as much faith as young people had, he never achieved the same cult like status

You misunderstand. Nick Clegg wrought untold damage upon his own reputation & that of the LibDems in the eyes of young voters now into their thirties. His actions were, and more importantly still are, viewed as a deep betrayal of trust that has never been forgiven. Corbyn has set himself up for the same from today's young voters, doubly so as they'll discover that they have been misled should he continue to pursue his current course.

trellheim

Corbyn would not renege on tuition fees I think, which is what sunk the libdems

Folkstonian

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Folkstonian wrote: »

Trident doesn’t use satellites for targeting, American or otherwise. It locks onto the stars for guidance. It doesn’t require American authorisation for launch either. God forbid it ever came to that, of course.

Care to comment on the time when HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant collided and took out the on-patrol missile subs of both countries ?
The only "what if" in the argument about 4 vs. 5 subs is "what if it happens again?"

It's a lot of money for a country that that doesn't have a magic money tree.



Without the safety net of the European Courts and EU laws the Tories can run roughshod over stuff like zero hour contracts and working time and all sorts of workers rights.

I’m not really well placed to comment - I’m not a physicist or a weapons engineer, I just have an interest in military history. When a submarine hits the open waters of the Atlantic, it is as good as undetectable I believe. Most people who actually know what they are talking about (I’m not including myself in that category!) seem to agree that submarines still provide the most effective nuclear deterrent.

Interestingly and as an aside, the reason the Royal Navy bases it’s submarines in Scotland is because it the most cloudy part of the U.K., affording much more concealment from Russian satellite surveillance in the more narrow sea lanes heading into and out of port than would be available if they were based down on the south coast!

Folkstonian

flatty wrote: »

Folkstonian wrote: »

Lemming wrote: »

Enzokk wrote: »

Here is an outlook if only 18-24 year olds were allowed to vote in the next general election. No surprise really as I believe there is research out there that found that people become more conservative as they get older. I bet there will be a fair few of these voters who would turn against Labour if they don't support staying in the EU, which incidentally is about the same percentage that would vote for them as per this poll.

Bold is my emphasis.

See "Nick Clegg". The same fate awaits Corbyn & Labour if they continue their current course.

I don’t see that same fate for Corbyn, as uniquely inept as he is. His followers would happily sacrifice Britain’s place in the EU, along with prosperity, safety and security, international cooperation with longstanding allies etc simply to see Jeremy in number ten.

As obviously charismatic as Clegg was (so the polar opposite to Corbyn) and as much faith as young people had, he never achieved the same cult like status

Same exactly could be said of the pm and her rivals.
None of them give a sh1te about the country really. Just power and/or personal profit.

I fully agree. There’s a really disappointing lack of civic duty in all sections of British society right now; from the people who shamefully watch, jeer, and film as police officers wrestle with violent criminals on London’s streets, to politicians who are entirely focused on career progression and care little for their responsibilities to the voting public

Water John

Ah, where is Cameron's, Big Society?

Capt'n Midnight

Water John wrote: »

Ah, where is Cameron's, Big Society?

This reminds me of the time they tried to brand the 1990's decade as "the caring nineties" at a time when the byword for the great and good was "greed is good"