Consequences Of Brexit [Part 9] Read First Post Before Posting

[Guest]

1 hour ago, harvey19 said:

I doubt if you as an individual could have done much .

It is the politicians, business people , industrialists etc. who can make new deals etc.

As individuals we can realise it has happened stop going over the old ground and enjoy life.

See my following post.

The "we" relates to the country.

1 - We are in agreement there

2 -  Politicians,  - They are the ones who got us into this position.  I'd like to think they could do something to  improve matters but I have no faith whatsoever in that.

       Business people,  - I'm sure there are no business people stood by with a deal that could be done and refusing to do it.  It's become slower, more expensive and so full of red tape to trade but, can this be changed ?????

3 -  As individuals,   - it makes no difference whether I complain or whether I tape my mouth up - Nothing whatsoever will be changed by this

 

The we,  which relates to the country,   can only be the same politicians,  Business people,  and individuals that we have just discussed    -    So where,  is this magic answer going to come from?

It's now more expensive to trade.   It's now more inconvenient to trade,  There are now too many delays to trade dur to red tape.  Possibly,  some in Europe may no longer wish to trade with us, I don't know.

The fact is, we are down and only the politicians can pull it back up by talking to Europe  ( which they are not ) .   I, my family and you, can make no difference whatsoever whether we shout or mute.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, m williamson said:

Perhaps we should give it a try? Maybe positive thinking is all that's required?

 

I mean if the band on the Titanic had played Alexanders Ragtime Band instead of that dirge Abide With Me it might well have made all the difference. 

Had that happened we'd never have got to see Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet play their parts.

Strangely enough,  I myself, had compared the situation on the Titanic with that of our country today.  Our situation is poor and  I have no faith that the ships company who steered us here will save the day.

I respect many of Harvey's contributions to our debates over time and have often enjoyed the debates but,   positive thought is a definite non-starter for actually having any effect at all, on our situation at this time.

[harvey19]

45 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

Strangely enough,  I myself, had compared the situation on the Titanic with that of our country today.  Our situation is poor and  I have no faith that the ships company who steered us here will save the day.

I respect many of Harvey's contributions to our debates over time and have often enjoyed the debates but,   positive thought is a definite non-starter for actually having any effect at all, on our situation at this time.

I agree it is positive thought leading to positive action that will succeed.

Negative thought, looking backwards and looking for faults to prove a point will only lead to failure .

 

I think I have exhausted (or become exhausted ! )  my input into this thread and sincerely hope the 3 of us old codgers can resume the debate in 5  years time.

Edited May 20, 2023 by harvey19

[Baron99]

42 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

Strangely enough,  I myself, had compared the situation on the Titanic with that of our country today.  Our situation is poor and  I have no faith that the ships company who steered us here will save the day.

I respect many of Harvey's contributions to our debates over time and have often enjoyed the debates but,   positive thought is a definite non-starter for actually having any effect at all, on our situation at this time.

My bold. 

 

Yes a good analogy.  We've left the iceberg, (European Commission), behind that for most of the 47 years, (no matter what political party was in Govt in the UK), we seemed to be continually bumping into. 

[sadbrewer]

On 18/05/2023 at 14:23, m williamson said:

The cooperation between European nations as a result of the EEC and the EU is the major reason for the length of peace in Europe not NATO.

 

Pure revisionism, one country started the last three major European Wars.. 1870,1914 and 1939 and that was Germany/Prussia. Germany was laid waste and divided in 1945 and then West Germany was rebuilt from the ground up mainly by the USA. For the next 50 years Germany could not build a weapon unless for NATO use, or sold with NATO permission. The East was solidly under the control of the Soviets.. hundreds of thousands of Allied and Soviet troops were on the ground in Germany as late as the 1990's...that is what guaranteed the peace. 

Edited May 20, 2023 by sadbrewer

[Baron99]

18 minutes ago, sadbrewer said:

Pure revisionism, one country started the last three major European Wars.. 1870,1914 and 1939 and that was Germany/Prussia. Germany was laid waste and divided in 1945 and then West Germany was rebuilt from the ground up mainly by the USA. For the next 50 years Germany could not build a weapon unless for NATO use, or sold with NATO permission. The East was solidly under the control of the Soviets.. hundreds of thousands of Allied and Soviet troops were on the ground in Germany as late as the 1990's...that is what guaranteed the peace. 

Agree.  I  can't believe such nonsense that the EU kept the peace in Europe is still beleved?  Clearly there are still some dim ones about.  The dim also conveniently forget about the Balkans conflict in the 1990's but never mind eh?  It just doesn't fit in with argument so we'll just not mention it. 

 

The dim should be educated that it was NATO up against the Eastern Bloc, 4,000+ main battle tanks; 250,000+ soldiers on each side & a few thousand ICBM's pointing at each other, along with the threat of mutually assured destruction (MAD), that actually kept the peace in Europe. 

[Baron99]

On 19/05/2023 at 14:10, m williamson said:

Leaving meant the UK becoming a Third Country.

 

 

My bold. 

 

Think you need to brush up on what a 'Third World' country is defined as? 

 

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/economics/third-world/

 

The UK is not & never will be a 'Third World' country.  You saying doesn't make it true. 

[m williamson]

50 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

My bold. 

 

Think you need to brush up on what a 'Third World' country is defined as? 

 

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/economics/third-world/

 

The UK is not & never will be a 'Third World' country.  You saying doesn't make it true. 

Try to actually read and comprehend what is posted before jumping in and making yourself look foolish.

 

I didn't say Third World Country, I said Third Country which is what we chose to become when we left the EU. The definition Third Country is used by the EU in order to describe any country which is not a member state or a member of the Single Market.

 

https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-014-8210?contextData=(sc.Default)

 

 

[m williamson]

1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

 

 

The dim should be educated that it was NATO up against the Eastern Bloc, 4,000+ main battle tanks; 250,000+ soldiers on each side & a few thousand ICBM's pointing at each other, along with the threat of mutually assured destruction (MAD), that actually kept the peace in Europe. 

The really, really dim need to be aware that Ukraine and Russia are both European country's and are currently at war with each other.

They should also understand that Ukraine has applied for EU membership in order to prevent it happening again.

 

When it comes to education they should also learn some history and realise that Winston Churchill, a man who perhaps knew a little bit more than they do about history also believed that a united states of Europe was needed to prevent future conflict between neighbouring countries.

 

https://european-union.europa.eu/system/files/2021-06/eu-pioneers-winston-churchill_en.pdf

 

https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/history-eu/eu-pioneers/winston-churchill_en

[BigPP]

1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

Agree.  I  can't believe such nonsense that the EU kept the peace in Europe is still beleved?  Clearly there are still some dim ones about.  The dim also conveniently forget about the Balkans conflict in the 1990's but never mind eh?  It just doesn't fit in with argument so we'll just not mention it. 

 

The dim should be educated that it was NATO up against the Eastern Bloc, 4,000+ main battle tanks; 250,000+ soldiers on each side & a few thousand ICBM's pointing at each other, along with the threat of mutually assured destruction (MAD), that actually kept the peace in Europe. 

 

2 hours ago, sadbrewer said:

Pure revisionism, one country started the last three major European Wars.. 1870,1914 and 1939 and that was Germany/Prussia. Germany was laid waste and divided in 1945 and then West Germany was rebuilt from the ground up mainly by the USA. For the next 50 years Germany could not build a weapon unless for NATO use, or sold with NATO permission. The East was solidly under the control of the Soviets.. hundreds of thousands of Allied and Soviet troops were on the ground in Germany as late as the 1990's...that is what guaranteed the peace. 

It's you two who are the revisionists.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Coal_and_Steel_Community

 

'The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was a European organization created after World War II to integrate Europe's coal and steel industries into a single common market based on the principle of supranationalism. It was formally established in 1951 by the Treaty  of Paris, signed by Belgium, France, Italy, 

Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany. The organization's subsequent enlargement of both members and duties ultimately led to the creation of the European Union.

 

The ECSC was first proposed via the Schuman Declaration by French foreign minister Robert Schuman on 9 May 1950 (commemorated in the EU as Europe Day), the day after the fifth anniversary of the end of World War II, to prevent another war between France and Germany. He declared "the solidarity in production" from pooling "coal and steel production" would make war between the two "not only unthinkable but materially impossible".

 

The Treaty created a common market among member states that stipulated free movement of goods (without customs duties or taxes) and prohibited states from introducing unfair competitive or discriminatory practices. Its terms were enforced by four institutions: a High Authority composed of independent appointees, a Common Assembly composed of national parliamentarians, a Special Council composed of national ministers, and a Court of Justice.

 

These would ultimately form the blueprint for today's European Commission, European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Court of Justice, respectively.'

 

The European Coal and Steel Community, EEC and then the EU have proven to be the most successful peace project in history.