Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)
Comments
-
correct horse battery staple wrote: »Ok, what is your non expert opinion on how Brexit will impact industry/business in UK?
Again i ask can you tell me what i have copied and pasted please?0 -
Lisbon is just bringing up the past and going off topic.
No i was not a fan of Brexit but see why it happened.
Not only do i blame the EU for its its own refusal to change. But I also blame the UK for is own self importance in today's world.
Both was to blame for Brexit as both will be to blame for no deal and both will blame everyone else and wonder how on earth it happened.
So called experts and if experts is your thing then Economists for Brexit are one such group.
Can you be a bit specific about what the EU refused to change that led to Brexit? Bearing in mind, of course, that just because the UK wanted something to change it would not happen unless the other members wanted it also.
If there was something specific and the UK could not get all the other members to accommodate them, the only options were that the UK accepted that it was outnumbered and carried on with the status quo, or it could leave.
I don't think that the UK left because the EU 'refused to change', it left because some of the people running the country persuaded voters that things would be better on the other side of Brexit.
So what was the EU expected to do? Was it expected to save the UK from itself? What change were they expected to make? The UK left, why would the EU have any obligations of any sort to the UK, except insofar as it was of benefit to the EU. Why would an independent, sovereign country like the UK need any concessions from the EU - the EU that it had spoken of with contempt, and where the government and press had persuaded the UK voters that anything that went wrong in the UK was down to the EU?0 -
I would not say any one thing was specific but a combination of EU law Democratic deficit in the European Union and immigration. These voices had been growing for a long time and nothing was really done. The UK was never really Europeans.
I would disagree. People voted to leave for various reasons not just because they was led to believe they would be retuning to the good ole days. People voted over issues I stated above and many more besides.
I don’t think the UK needs saving they will be ok as the UK or as separate independent countries. The EU will need to take a long look at itself when Brexit is finally over it will need to answer about its role and its worth to it citizens. I could see more integration coming.
Have you considered you are parroting articles from the last twenty years of UK gutter press owned by billionaires. Individuals who are heavily restricted by workers rights and tax legislation within the EU. 80% of UK media is owned by 6 individuals. Does that not tell you something a bit unsettling.
Talking points designed to cause outrage and page clicks with rarely a modicum of factual basis.0 -
The various pro-Brexit arguments were based on absolute nonsense.I would not say any one thing was specific but a combination of EU law Democratic deficit in the European Union and immigration. These voices had been growing for a long time and nothing was really done.
The level of understanding of the EU, it's role and how it works amongst voters was very low. The leading search on Google in the aftermath of the referendum was "what is the EU?".
In terms of immigration, this was something that the UK could have but failed to act upon. It had nothing to do with the EU. The pro-Brexit lies about foreigners coming only fuelled the level of ignorance. Ironic that more foreigners are coming now that they've left the EU.
Whilst many of their politicians have been including Thatcher, as a nation I agree, they never wanted to be part of Europe.The UK was never really Europeans.
So you seem to agree that the reasons were nonsense.I would disagree. People voted to leave for various reasons not just because they was led to believe they would be retuning to the good ole days. People voted over issues I stated above and many more besides.
I don’t think the UK needs saving they will be ok as the UK or as separate independent countries. The EU will need to take a long look at itself when Brexit is finally over it will need to answer about its role and its worth to it citizens. I could see more integration coming.
Have you any reasons why Brexit might be a good thing?
As for the UK being ok, they are heading straight to join a club of very few other countries that operate on WTO terms by having no trade agreements. In fact, it's probably worse than that because they want to quickly move from a situation where they had a comfortable trading relationship across the world. Soon, they will have no relationship. They are being led by a government intent on wrecklessness and inflicting damage on their countries economy.
As for the EU needing to take a long look at itself - why? What have they done that they need time to reflect? They laid out their position at the start. It has been the Uk all along that decided to waste time, dither, not seek extensions, not lay out their plans clearly and lie to their electorate about the benefits of leaving.
Have the EU lied? Not to my knowledge.
Have the EU blocked the UK from leaving? No, sure the Uk have already left.
Have the EU stopped the UK from securing a trade agreement? Nope again. The UK just want to have the ssame access to trade without having to keep to the same set of standards as the EU members (creating an unfair playing field).
Brexit is a UK decision and one based on decades of delusion about the union within the UK. Talk of taking back control is just populist nonsense. There is no control to take back. At a high level, Brexit really was about breaking up the EU, nothing else.
Your opinion on both Brexit and the current negotiations seems to be based on a few articles taken from the Express or Daily Mail.0 -
Seth Brundle wrote: »The various pro-Brexit arguments were based on absolute nonsense.
The level of understanding of the EU, it's role and how it works amongst voters was very low. The leading search on Google in the aftermath of the referendum was "what is the EU?".
In terms of immigration, this was something that the UK could have but failed to act upon. It had nothing to do with the EU. The pro-Brexit lies about foreigners coming only fuelled the level of ignorance. Ironic that more foreigners are coming now that they've left the EU.
Whilst many of their politicians have been including Thatcher, as a nation I agree, they never wanted to be part of Europe.
So you seem to agree that the reasons were nonsense.
Have you any reasons why Brexit might be a good thing?
As for the UK being ok, they are heading straight to join a club of very few other countries that operate on WTO terms by having no trade agreements. In fact, it's probably worse than that because they want to quickly move from a situation where they had a comfortable trading relationship across the world. Soon, they will have no relationship. They are being led by a government intent on wrecklessness and inflicting damage on their countries economy.
As for the EU needing to take a long look at itself - why? What have they done that they need time to reflect? They laid out their position at the start. It has been the Uk all along that decided to waste time, dither, not seek extensions, not lay out their plans clearly and lie to their electorate about the benefits of leaving.
Have the EU lied? Not to my knowledge.
Have the EU blocked the UK from leaving? No, sure the Uk have already left.
Have the EU stopped the UK from securing a trade agreement? Nope again. The UK just want to have the ssame access to trade without having to keep to the same set of standards as the EU members (creating an unfair playing field).
Brexit is a UK decision and one based on decades of delusion about the union within the UK. Talk of taking back control is just populist nonsense. There is no control to take back. At a high level, Brexit really was about breaking up the EU, nothing else.
Your opinion on both Brexit and the current negotiations seems to be based on a few articles taken from the Express or Daily Mail.
I have never said brexit was a good idea.
But i wont criticise a nation for leaving thats there own decision.
Your post was excellnt but ruined by thinking my views are direct from reading the Mail or Express. I put them in the same leauge as the Sun.0 -
Advertisement
-
listermint wrote: »Have you considered you are parroting articles from the last twenty years of UK gutter press owned by billionaires. Individuals who are heavily restricted by workers rights and tax legislation within the EU. 80% of UK media is owned by 6 individuals. Does that not tell you something a bit unsettling.
Talking points designed to cause outrage and page clicks with rarely a modicum of factual basis.
Then the Unions need to get off there lazy back sides and fight .
Yes the gutter press will love it but as i say Unions need to start planning0 -
Seth Brundle wrote: »
Whilst many of their politicians have been including Thatcher, as a nation I agree, they never wanted to be part of Europe.
I'm not so sure about this part of your post.
IMO the problem seems to be that a lot of the English see themselves as a superior race, compared to the foreigners across the water. They give me the impression that if they were in charge, they would be the most ardent supporters of the project.
There is definitely a sense of ill feeling at being 'ruled' by the French, but particularly by the Germans. This is how they view the EU.
Hubris doesn't even cover it.0 -
Silent Running wrote: »I'm not so sure about this part of your post.
IMO the problem seems to be that a lot of the English see themselves as a superior race, compared to the foreigners across the water. They give me the impression that if they were in charge, they would be the most ardent supporters of the project.
There is definitely a sense of ill feeling at being 'ruled' by the French, but particularly by the Germans. This is how they view the EU.
Hubris doesn't even cover it.
How do we tell which are which? Do the superior ones wear a badge or something? Superior race is an ironic terms seeing as the last group preaching superior races were certain Germans and if my memory serves the U.K. were part of the Allies who beat them off with a stick.....
IMO the English media have more to answer for than anyone or anything else, there are far too many gutter rags there who literally print lies to sway and sow doubt and hatred purely to fulfil their own agendas.0 -
The first question that any journalist should be asking, but from the coverage I have seen so far none of them are, is why Johnson agreed with the WA in the first place?
In fairness to those journalists, Johnson hardly ever turns up for questions from him and we mostly hear from him from statements or his spokesperson. Nobody can answer that question other than Johnson really.0 -
Thanks for posting that. Here it is, tidied up a bit:An Ciarraioch wrote: »Allowing for the clunkiness of Google Translate, a German MEP's statement on the negotiations:
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fbernd-lange.de%2Fmeldungen%2Fwir-lassen-uns-nicht-erpressenBernd Lange, MEP wrote:Apparently a planned bill for the British internal market contradicts the obligations in the Withdrawal Agreement on Northern Ireland and on state aid - this undermines an international treaty. If so, are the ongoing trade deal negotiations doomed? How can the UK government be trusted to honour treaties?
I'm shocked. This is not how you deal with negotiating partners. I haven't seen anything like it in decades ... We will not allow ourselves to be blackmailed. There were signs that the joint political declaration for Boris Johnson was not worth the paper it was written on. Now he's said it. In doing so, Boris Johnson is turning the negotiations so far and the serious efforts of the European Union into a farce.
We will not allow ourselves to be divided by these tactical games, but will stick to our previous constructive but determined approach - in the spirit of the joint political declaration of eight months ago, which both sides had signed. We stick to agreements. The European Parliament reaffirmed its negotiating position in a resolution in July. There cannot and will not be an agreement at any price.
What madness to believe today that one can achieve actual sovereignty in complete independence. In today's sea of globalisation with powerful global players, sovereignty can only be developed together. This shows the success story of the EU and the many countries that have concluded treaties and stick to them. The British illusion of sovereignty will lead to the greatest loss of sovereignty in British history.0 -
Advertisement
-
Here seems to be some more detail on what awaits on Wednesday,
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1302934667511975936?s=20
Number 3 there seems to be the problem, not sure the EU will take the UK diluting the obligations on State Aid in NI at the whim of ministers. Big fight it seems to be then.
Isn’t there a large bus company in NI which was sold to one of Johnson’s backers, which would expect some state aid. Didn’t KCB end up buying Wright’s?0 -
Cork_Guest wrote: »How do we tell which are which? Do the superior ones wear a badge or something? Superior race is an ironic terms seeing as the last group preaching superior races were certain Germans and if my memory serves the U.K. were part of the Allies who beat them off with a stick.....
I dont think race is the right word, its much more nationalistic than xenophobic when it comes to the Brits entitled attitude to how they see themselves being ruled over by foreigners and the EU.
This all comes back to their education system painting a very rose tinted view of their Empirical history and glossing over pretty much all of the serious atrocities they were responsible for.
Its also a weird bastardised version of "the blitz spirit" that a certain generation of them see themselves as being at the forefront of.
Theres a clip from question time that i feel highlights this bizarre view of history this generation hold perfectly. Its of a man who couldnt be older than 60 arguing why a no deal would be no problem because in his words "we got through World War 1 and 2".... whos this we hes talking about? Hes literally volunteering the country to go through a situation that hes saying wont be as bad as the two World Wars that he had zero involvement in so it will be grand.0 -
I dont think race is the right word, its much more nationalistic than xenophobic when it comes to the Brits entitled attitude to how they see themselves being ruled over by foreigners and the EU.
This all comes back to their education system painting a very rose tinted view of their Empirical history and glossing over pretty much all of the serious atrocities they were responsible for.
Its also a weird bastardised version of "the blitz spirit" that a certain generation of them see themselves as being at the forefront of.
Theres a clip from question time that i feel highlights this bizarre view of history this generation hold perfectly. Its of a man who couldnt be older than 60 arguing why a no deal would be no problem because in his words "we got through World War 1 and 2".... whos this we hes talking about? Hes literally volunteering the country to go through a situation that hes saying wont be as bad as the two World Wars that he had zero involvement in so it will be grand.
Just out of curiosity, I may have missed it; but how are so many on here such experts in the British educational system and how Brits think?
All of these generalisations really get my back up, there’s plenty of decent Brits and theirs plenty of assholes here. This generalising does nothing but stoke hatred.
Nobody ever seems to remember the Italian empire, or the German attempts far far sooner ago in time. Should the Brits be allowed to hate the French due to then Norman invasion or is it weak of them to have let it go?
The fact is it was easy to turn a lot of Brits off of the EU seeing as they’re one of the biggest net contributors yet also had to take larger shares of migrants when we have only recently become a very small net contributor and already have protests over the comparatively tiny amount of migrants we have to home.
People seem to forget that the U.K. has a commonwealth of DOUBLE the countries of the EU, free to join or leave as seen fit and of huge benefit to the majority of members.
Personally, I’m so sick of Brexit that I’d rather it just goes No Deal and we see who was right and who was wrong!!0 -
Cork_Guest wrote: »Just out of curiosity, I may have missed it; but how are so many on here such experts in the British educational system and how Brits think?
Well theres quite a lot of articles detailing it, heres one from just 2 months ago
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2020/06/history-british-empire-not-taught-schools-curriculumCork_Guest wrote: »All of these generalisations really get my back up, there’s plenty of decent Brits and theirs plenty of assholes here. This generalising does nothing but stoke hatred.
What generalising? I very specifically made the point of distinguishing a specific generation as being the issue and its been widely discussed, polled on and acknowledged who the main age groups, demographics and generations were that voted for and against brexit were.Cork_Guest wrote: »Nobody ever seems to remember the Italian empire, or the German attempts far far sooner ago in time. Should the Brits be allowed to hate the French due to then Norman invasion or is it weak of them to have let it go?
Do the French, Germans or Italians continually ignore or refuse to acknowledge their historical wrongdoings?Cork_Guest wrote: »Personally, I’m so sick of Brexit that I’d rather it just goes No Deal and we see who was right and who was wrong!!
Join the club0 -
Just finished this documentary
https://youtu.be/np_ylvc8Zj8
Not sure if I picked it up here or elsewhere. It's absolutely infuriating. In many ways it's stuff you already know or at least skimming knowledge off. But when you go a small bit deeper it's madness.
One thing that stands out for me though is I always wondered how the pound managed to stay so strong throughout this whole nonsense. I'm now of the opinion they are funnelling money back onshore from offshore to artificially keep the pound high. It's an impervious lifeline.
And some of the character along the way are the same type that say fk business like boris. It's not traditional business that makes then money it's the nefarious stuff.
Oh and it's a fascinating watch. I believe every single Tory voter specifically in red wall areas should be made watch it in full.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13683
listermint wrote: »Just finished this documentary
https://youtu.be/np_ylvc8Zj8
Not sure if I picked it up here or elsewhere. It's absolutely infuriating. In many ways it's stuff you already know or at least skimming knowledge off. But when you go a small bit deeper it's madness.
It's an interesting documentary. Not sure how accurate it is though. I think their effort to draw a line from imperial London to present day London is not accurate though. An interesting article from Deloitte points out that it had slumped significantly right up until the end of the 1970s (co-incidentally when they joined the EEC?):
https://blogs.deloitte.co.uk/mondaybriefing/2019/08/the-decline-and-rise-of-london.html
Also, anecdotally I know, but London really took off in the late 90s and early 2000s as you could see from visiting it. in the early 90s, Places like One Canada Place (Canary Wharf) was dramatically different to the rest of London which was still mostly low rise, by the early 2000s London was more high rise than not with iconic buildings like the Gherkin, and even during the recession of 2008 onwards, places like the Shard sprung up.
A lot of this is to do with investment from outside the EU. The UK has positioned itself as being in the EU but not of it, with a stable economy etc, thus making a very attractive place for storing Russian, Chinese, Arabian Sovereign Wealth Fund and other international funds.
Obviously the off shore stuff plays a part. They are, after all, the largest tax haven in Europe, and their control of the press narrative is so strong that they had the world beliving that it was actually Ireland that was doing that. That part of the documentary, at least, is spot on.
But however you look at it, whether it is a money laundering centre or just a good safe investment city, Brexit is likely to cause massive disruption to that. I wonder how the city of London will justify its existence in a post no deal Brexit world?One thing that stands out for me though is I always wondered how the pound managed to stay so strong throughout this whole nonsense. I'm not of the opinion they are funnelling money back onshore from offshore to artificially keep the pound high. It's an impervious lifeline.
Well it lost approximately 30% of its value so I wouldn't say that it stayed strong as such. As to why it hasn't collapsed like say the Rouble in 90s Russia, well Brexit for all its madness and corruption is not in any way comparable to the changes brought about by the fall of communism and the mass privatisation of industry.And some of the character along the way are the same type that say fk business like boris. It's not traditional business that makes then money it's the nefarious stuff.
Well its both to be honest. But its undeniable that London benefitted from being the second loosest regulatory environment in the European Union (after Luxembourg) and from being seen as the nexus point between Europe and the world.
The trick for Europe is to encourage the good businesses to relocate to another EU Member State, while discouraging the less salubrious aspects of London's financial industry.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13683
Mod note:
Democratic Deficit in the EU is not relevant to Brexit. It can be discussed separately here, if you want:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058111359#0 -
Some interesting dynamic happening in NI, where Arlene Foster has seemingly accepted the WA and was starting to make preparations for the border in the Irish Sea, however the DUP wasn't all on board at all.
Now with the UK seemingly saying they will rip up the WA, the DUP is all on board that train again,
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1303059176432766977?s=20
If I could offer the DUP advice, wait and see how the winds are going to blow before proclaiming victory over the Irish Protocol. Johnson is just as likely to rip it up as to strengthen it, so much like the EU waiting to see what the legislation is, it would be the prudent action at this time. It does seem like that is what they are doing for the moment as well.0 -
New story from The Telegraph this evening,
https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/1303068313883414528?s=20
While this is not really a laughing matter, it is absolutely hilarious how Johnson was proclaiming his deal as oven ready less than a year ago but is now trying to get out of it. To think we were worried about no-deal this time last year and now an even worse option is on the table.0 -
Completely insane. He took pride in negotiating it, and now claims the thing he negotiated, basically the same as May's deal anyway, makes no sense, that he didn't understand it.
https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1303080072409157632?s=190 -
Advertisement
-
Cork_Guest wrote: »People seem to forget that the U.K. has a commonwealth of DOUBLE the countries of the EU, free to join or leave as seen fit and of huge benefit to the majority of members.
The Commonwealth is of little significance in trade terms. Ironically the British abandoned the Commonwealth as an instrument of trade in favour of the EEC when it joined because it realised that Europe had far more to offer in economic terms than its former far flung empire. The UK has little if any trading relationship with the Commonwealth today.
The only wealthy members of the Commonwealth who might offer some kind of market for British made goods are Australia, NZ and Canada. As the name might imply, the UK has an Australia type trading relationship with Australia (aka no trade deal), the same with NZ, and its trade relationship with Canada is part of an EU trade deal which the UK will lose at the end of the year.
Both Australia and Canada have indicated that they put the EU ahead of the UK on their list of trading priorities and want to wait to see what kind of concessions the EU can force from the UK before they come in to demand the same.0 -
Completely insane. He took pride in negotiating it, and now claims the thing he negotiated, basically the same as May's deal anyway, makes no sense, that he didn't understand it.
https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1303080072409157632?s=19
If it were not so serious it would be funny.0 -
New story from The Telegraph this evening,
https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/1303068313883414528?s=20
While this is not really a laughing matter, it is absolutely hilarious how Johnson was proclaiming his deal as oven ready less than a year ago but is now trying to get out of it. To think we were worried about no-deal this time last year and now an even worse option is on the table.
That should be an interesting meeting. I would just have various clips of Boris saying the WA is a "great deal for Britain" playing in the background as he tries to convince EU leaders that what was black in January is white in September.0 -
New story from The Telegraph this evening,
https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/1303068313883414528?s=20
While this is not really a laughing matter, it is absolutely hilarious how Johnson was proclaiming his deal as oven ready less than a year ago but is now trying to get out of it. To think we were worried about no-deal this time last year and now an even worse option is on the table.
I'm old enough to remember when brexiters used to get terribly exercised about the need to respect the democratically-expressed view of the people, even when it wasn't legally binding. They used to throw around words like "betrayal' and "traitor" and "antidemocratic".Completely insane. He took pride in negotiating it, and now claims the thing he negotiated, basically the same as May's deal anyway, makes no sense, that he didn't understand it.
https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1303080072409157632?s=19
But the withdrawal agreement, as well as being legally binding, has an unimpeachable democratic mandate. Johnson called and fought a general election on manifesto commitment to ratify and implement the WA; he won an 80-seat majority. The Parliament thus elected duly passed legislation to ratify and implement the WA,and the Tory party were whipped to support that legislation, consistently with their manifesto commitment. Both people and parliament have spoken unambiguously; the WA is the Will of the People and must be implemented, come what may.
Plus, it is legally binding.
I confidently predict that those Brexiters who are not rank hypocrites will now turn on Johnson and denounce his empty promises and all his works and pomps. When he is openly subverting the Will of the People; no other course is open to a Brexiter of integrity.0 -
No tricks required, after 4 years of Brexit-dominated UK politics. The British political did all the encouraging that was needed.johnnyskeleton wrote: »(...)
Well its both to be honest. But its undeniable that London benefitted from being the second loosest regulatory environment in the European Union (after Luxembourg) and from being seen as the nexus point between Europe and the world.
The trick for Europe is to encourage the good businesses to relocate to another EU Member State, while discouraging the less salubrious aspects of London's financial industry.
You may be pleased to note that Dublin was considered the overall winner (for relocated ex-City finservices) as of Oct.2019, ahead of Luxembourg.0 -
Quite - the ire of brexiters of principle, integrity and honesty will be quite something to behold on this point.Peregrinus wrote: »I confidently predict that those Brexiters who are not rank hypocrites will now turn on Johnson and denounce his empty promises and all his works and pomps. When he is openly subverting the Will of the People; no other course is open to a Brexiter of integrity.0 -
-
David Davis doing the rounds this morning, with his moronic chuckle, saying how it's fine to ignore the WA, because it was based on the idea of getting a trade deal.
Presume there is nothing in the WA that says "All of the above can be ignored if a trade deal is not agreed between the UK and EU"- in fact, isn't it the complete opposite? The EU wanted the WA agreed before any trade talks even commenced. They are completely separate entities. The WA is needed, in no small part because certain things have to be agreed even if there is no trade deal.0 -
David Davis doing the rounds this morning, with his moronic chuckle, saying how it's fine to ignore the WA, because it was based on the idea of getting a trade deal.
Presume there is nothing in the WA that says "All of the above can be ignored if a trade deal is not agreed between the UK and EU"- in fact, isn't it the complete opposite? The EU wanted the WA agreed before any trade talks even commenced. They are completely separate entities. The WA is needed, in no small part because certain things have to be agreed even if there is no trade deal.
Haven't heard him but I assume that the interviewer asked whether all agreements could be treated as such, since the GE had clearly voted for the WA, why is it allowed to be ditched by the ref itself seemingly can never be rerun?
And secondly, what confidence can the UK place on any agreement with the EU when apparently agreements can simply be tossed aside whenever the parties feel like it. Can the EU impose tariffs whenever they like on the UK despite a FTA?0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 13683
And secondly, what confidence can the UK place on any agreement with the EU when apparently agreements can simply be tossed aside whenever the parties feel like it.
I dont think the UK believe that all parties can ignore agreements. Just themselves. Its like British exceptionalism. They correctly see that the EU will comply with what they have agreed, while not wanting to do the same themselves.Can the EU impose tariffs whenever they like on the UK despite a FTA?
Well if theres no deal it will be WTO terms which means tarrifs at the EUs standard schedule*.
An interesting question is whether the EU can or will impose trade sanctions for breech of the WA. I think they can, but its not entirely clear, but I dont think they will. It would be a bad look for Europe if things deteriorated to such an extent that there was a trade war between the EU and the UK. No one benefits from that.
*unless Brexiteers completely decimate the economy and move to Africa, in which case they will get Everything But Arms free access to the EU.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement