Bob Arctor Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 The anticipation of future further unwanted, unwelcome directives and political decisions from the EU that won't sit well with Britain? I would have thought that that was obvious; I'm just speculating on what these things could be that's all. Perhaps an EU army with conscription? the EU wanting to distance itself from the US? an insistence that all member states adopt the Euro and Schengen? tougher regulation on the Financial sector harming the City of London? or insisting that the City not be so dominant and that Berlin and Paris have more of that? And only the far-sighted British government saw this coming, right? Not the Polish government, the Dutch, Spain. Just the British. Right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 Like this, https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/17/european-union-president-rejects-trump-call-for-more-nato-spending.html So there you have it....the US interfering with the sovereign decisions of EU member states, and the EU member states refusing to give up the sovereign decision around how much they spend on defence. I’m entirely unsure about what point you are trying to make but it appears you just blasted one of your feet off. Thanks for posting BTW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 NO to EU militarisation! NO to an EU army! Yeah, because the EU is always starting wars, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria.....no wait its AMERICA that's always starting wars that we - often inexplicably - choose to join in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 So there you have it....the US interfering with the sovereign decisions of EU member states, and the EU member states refusing to give up the sovereign decision around how much they spend on defence. I’m entirely unsure about what point you are trying to make but it appears you just blasted one of your feet off. Thanks for posting BTW In which case you wont mind picking up the whole bill if the US pull out, best of luck with your new army when you move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 In which case you wont mind picking up the whole bill if the US pull out, best of luck with your new army when you move. They won’t pull out. Not a chance. Because if they do they risk European countries (and not just EU countries) becoming more closely aligned with Russia It’s another ridiculous fantasy. The military-industrial complex in the US would never allow it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 When people start shouting you know they have lost the plot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 Crops rotting in the fields: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cornwall-council-appeal-government-crops-rotting-migrant-labour-a8049391.html Now where are all those lazy British unemployed people who can be forced to pick them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chalga Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 NO to EU militarisation! NO to an EU army! There you go look,not even gone yet,but still trying to meddle in the affairs of 27 other countries,if it were the other way around the Right Wing Rags would be screaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 Like this, https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/17/european-union-president-rejects-trump-call-for-more-nato-spending.html The reality is going to look more like this: UK offers to maintain defence and security cooperation with EU Britain has played one its strongest cards in the EU negotiations by offering to put its defence, security and aid assets at the disposal of the European Union in the hope of getting concessions on future trading and economic relations. The offer extends to continuing to share embassies with the EU, provide intelligence information and undertake regular joint EU-led military missions. My bold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 (edited) Yes I saw it and its your mistake again, try reading post 3104 again. No, people vote to be out, being worse off or it being a success was never mentioned. Which is patently ridiculous, of course people voted for it to be a success, they voted based on the promises of the leave campaign. Despite being asked to back up your statement that during the referendum the promise of it being a success was made all you could do is state: "I'm pretty sure there were many promises made by Vote Leave that could only be realised if Brexit is a success, things like..." Well, actually I'm not pretty certain, I'm absolutely certain. The list of promises isn't hard to find. Which changes the whole context which was quite specific in that there was no promise of Brexit being a success. All you could reply was that you were pretty sure but not give specifics and then talk about promises. I state again that no promises were made stating that Brexit will be a success. Lol, you guys really are getting desperate How many of the promises that the leave campaign made can be realised if Brexit is not a success? Seems its you that sidestepped the question. You wish, but the reality is that Brexit does have to be a success to realise those promises. Success is implicit in them. If it doesn't you guys are going to be the butt of people's jokes and recipients of their ire possibly for the rest of your lives. I can see why there's a lot of desperate attempts to re-write history from the leavers on here. Edited November 11, 2017 by Magilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts