unbeliever Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 Have another think about that. Just how will this EU Army come about? What is it for? What is the line of command and control? In January 1861, there were 34 states in the USA. 7 of the states (for rather bad reasons which I think we all know) didn't want to be part of the Union any more and declared themselves independent forming the "Confederacy". They were later joined by 4 more. The bulk of the other states formed an army and forcibly brought the 11 confederate states back into the union where they have remained ever since. About 800,000 people died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 And it is your hope that the EU will reform but there are no guarantees that it will, its down to what you think is more likely, EU reform after we vote to stay or a successful UK after we vote to leave, you think the former and I think the later. We have a UK-specific commitment to no further integration that is going to be written into the next EU treaty. We don't have to integrate any further and it is now up to us to drive reform to suit us from the slow lane. So it's not something I think, it's something I know. You only have vague hopes and no guarantees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 We have a UK-specific commitment to no further integration that is going to be written into the next EU treaty. We don't have to integrate any further and it is now up to us to drive reform to suit us from the slow lane. So it's not something I think, it's something I know. You only have vague hopes and no guarantees. Commitments are often broken and how will the stay camp drive the reform and what will the reform look like? Looks like a leap into the dark to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 We have a UK-specific commitment to no further integration that is going to be written into the next EU treaty. We don't have to integrate any further and it is now up to us to drive reform to suit us from the slow lane. So it's not something I think, it's something I know. You only have vague hopes and no guarantees. No you don't. You have a promise to "respect our wish" not to integrate further. In the same breath you have a statement that we will continue to integrate at a "different rate". It's a lie. It's not your lie so I don't blame you. But that doesn't change the fact that it's a big fat porkie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 No you don't. You have a promise to "respect our wish" not to integrate further. In the same breath you have a statement that we will continue to integrate at a "different rate". It's a lie. It's not your lie so I don't blame you. But that doesn't change the fact that it's a big fat porkie. We covered this yesterday. While the 2014 statement does appear contradictory if you want to be anal about the wording, the recent agreement tightens up the language and makes provision to write the UK-specific agreement into the next treaty. ---------- Post added 06-03-2016 at 19:07 ---------- Commitments are often broken and how will the stay camp drive the reform and what will the reform look like? Looks like a leap into the dark to me. The way it would be broken is if it failed to be written into the next treaty. Unlikely but if that happened I don't think we'd even need another referendum on leaving. Parliament could just take us out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) The way it would be broken is if it failed to be written into the next treaty. Unlikely but if that happened I don't think we'd even need another referendum on leaving. Parliament could just take us out. But they wouldn't, member all the promises made to the Scots that the government then broke. Alex Salmond says Scotland could “exact revenge” on the Westminster parties at the ballot box because a huge gap has opened up between their proposals for devolution and what they promised on the eve of the independence referendum. How many years have you had faith on David Cameron to deliver what he promises? David Cameron’s EU deal is – in legal terms – not worth the paper it’s printed on David Jones is Conservative MP for Clwyd West and a former secretary of state for Wales. Edited March 6, 2016 by sutty27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 But they wouldn't, member all the promises made to the Scots that the government then broke. Alex Salmond says Scotland could “exact revenge” on the Westminster parties at the ballot box because a huge gap has opened up between their proposals for devolution and what they promised on the eve of the independence referendum. How many years have you had faith on David Cameron to deliver what he promises? David Cameron’s EU deal is – in legal terms – not worth the paper it’s printed on David Jones is Conservative MP for Clwyd West and a former secretary of state for Wales. We have the necessary sovereignty to repeal any legislation at any time, including the 1972 act that took us into the EU. Parliament could start the process tomorrow. There is nothing that could theoretically stop it happening. It is not dependent on a referendum. The UK parliament is sovereign in that respect. As for whether Cameron's deal is legally binding, Gove is already on the naughty step for mistakenly making that argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) We have the necessary sovereignty to repeal any legislation at any time, including the 1972 act that took us into the EU. Parliament could start the process tomorrow. There is nothing that could theoretically stop it happening. It is not dependent on a referendum. The UK parliament is sovereign in that respect. As for whether Cameron's deal is legally binding, Gove is already on the naughty step for mistakenly making that argument. I don't dispute that we have the power to leave without a referendum, but it won't be used after a yes to stay vote even if all the promises are broken, not that the promises amount to much anyway. I agree that Cameron does like to reprimand anyone that dares to disagree with him. Edited March 6, 2016 by sutty27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) We covered this yesterday. While the 2014 statement does appear contradictory if you want to be anal about the wording, the recent agreement tightens up the language and makes provision to write the UK-specific agreement into the next treaty. I'm not being anal. They've deliberately worded it so it sounds like integration will stop but actually says it will just be slower than for other states. Anyway, all that bovine excrement will quietly vanish if they get the referendum result they want. Do you have a link to the text of the recent agreement? Edited March 6, 2016 by unbeliever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 I'm not being anal. They've deliberately worded it so it sounds like integration will stop but actually says it will just be slower than for other states. Anyway, all that bovine excrement will quietly vanish if they get the referendum result they want. Do you have a link to the text of the recent agreement? Er, go and find it yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts