JFKvsNixon Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Depends. We're stronger with the USA as an ally than without. If the USA were to withdraw from NATO, surely that would be the time to enact alternatives. Nobody has suggested that we're stronger without having the USA as an ally! Maybe it would strengthen out ties with the USA if we didn't take their help for granted and organised our defences a bit better? It would take some of the wind out of the American isolationist sails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ez8004 Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Out doing well, actually put a bet on, never bet before, lol. If you think Remain's 73% chance of winning is doing well for Leave then so be it. You've just lost your money lol. I wouldn't bet in future if I was you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 How it is irrelevant. What is a better historical analogue? How is it relevant? You've lost me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 How is it relevant? You've lost me. It's an historical example of a group of independent states joining together voluntarily into a federation. Strangely enough in the aftermath of a devastating war. 80 years after the federation was formed a few of the states tried to reassert their independence. They found that they could not. We were discussing whether or not the UK would always have the freedom to Brexit under its own authority. Now that you're all caught up. What could me more relevant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 You know that that isn't an accurate description of what happened. The EU amended the treaty, and took the Irish concerns into account then put it back up for referendum. Isn't that how democracy is meant to work? If the Irish had said yes in the first place do you think the referendum would have been held again? I've asked you this before but you must have missed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrystottle Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 What is relevant and hasn't been mentioned much is the likely cost to the UK if we remain in the EU. With places like Kosovo and Albania wanting to join. They are skint; they will want some "EU funds". And these funds will come from the net contributors to the EU budget - Germany, France, UK, Netherlands, Italy, etc. In other words if we stay in we are going to pay even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 It's an historical example of a group of independent states joining together voluntarily into a federation. Strangely enough in the aftermath of a devastating war. 80 years after the federation was formed a few of the states tried to reassert their independence. They found that they could not. We were discussing whether or not the UK would always have the freedom to Brexit under its own authority. Now that you're all caught up. What could me more relevant? Unless you can demonstrate that the treaties the southern states signed up to included a clause saying they were free to leave (as the treaties we've signed up to with the EU do) then it's not a relevant example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Did you read the article? There is nothing sinister going on re an EU army. What is sinister is Nigel Farage wanting to abolish Race Discrimination Laws! An EU army is an inevitability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzer1 Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 You will have to hope there is no eu army because if there is it will be the good old UK paying for it and supplying the men and equipment. We together with France are the only 2 military nations in the eu. For instance Germany, bigger in size/ population /gdp has an army two thirds in size of ours, do not even mention the navy and air force. Majority of eu NATO members do not spend the 2% GDP set by NATO, we only did it after threats from USA. The initial plan is for eu command and control structures, my only questions are whats the point of this when you have NATO European command and control structures and secondly when you have no troops to deploy. But as a starting point set up the command and control structures, followed by the logistics then once you have these you can go back to members and say we might have well have eu troops so give us yours, thats how it starts. As far as another referendum Sheff, think this is it there will be no more in the near future, the eu would not like/want it and I don,t think another govt here would want to go through this again. The conservatives won,t because of the in fighting, Labour won,t because Corbyn has sold out his beliefs for whatever reason. Liberals are a spent force at the moment so the only hope would be UKIP getting in power, you never know what the future will bring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 If the Irish had said yes in the first place do you think the referendum would have been held again? I've asked you this before but you must have missed it. Just to confirm, are you're asking if the people of Ireland had said that they were happy with the treaty. Whether or not I believe that the EU would have changed the treaty to something that that Irish wouldn't have been so happy with, and held the referendum again? If I've understood your question correctly, sorry for not answering it as I didn't think it was a serious question. ---------- Post added 05-06-2016 at 18:28 ---------- You will have to hope there is no eu army because if there is it will be the good old UK paying for it and supplying the men and equipment. We together with France are the only 2 military nations in the eu. For instance Germany, bigger in size/ population /gdp has an army two thirds in size of ours, do not even mention the navy and air force. Majority of eu NATO members do not spend the 2% GDP set by NATO, we only did it after threats from USA. The initial plan is for eu command and control structures, my only questions are whats the point of this when you have NATO European command and control structures and secondly when you have no troops to deploy. But as a starting point set up the command and control structures, followed by the logistics then once you have these you can go back to members and say we might have well have eu troops so give us yours, thats how it starts. As far as another referendum Sheff, think this is it there will be no more in the near future, the eu would not like/want it and I don,t think another govt here would want to go through this again. The conservatives won,t because of the in fighting, Labour won,t because Corbyn has sold out his beliefs for whatever reason. Liberals are a spent force at the moment so the only hope would be UKIP getting in power, you never know what the future will bring. Why would the Germans need a navy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts