The EU "Deal" - poll!

[Teflon Lettuce]

This is the biggest problem with the Leave campaign. It believes that the UK should get everything its own way, and anyone with a modicum of sense could tell that that was never going to happen.

I don't think anyone apart from the likes of BoJo and the Moggies {good name for a band that?} ever thought that the UK would get everything it wanted.... but what exactly do we get from the deal on offer? the deal on the table is Brexit in name only. It ties us even closer to Europe and makes it even harder to make the final leap.... I really do not understand why remainers {or more to the point TM and our negotiators} can't see that this is just another, admittedly more subtle, way of the EU saying "think again" just like it has when interfering in the internal affairs of member states.. it has done it numerous times in national elections and referenda where it doesn't like the answer given on the ballot paper....the EU is such a paragon of democracy isn't it... "you can have a free vote on the matter as long as you give us the answer we want!"

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

I've got an idea.

Let's stay then. We get the benefits AND the say. Just a thought, like.

You mean give into the bullying of the EU? and that fulfills the will of the people how exactly?

 

[EM2]

it has done it numerous times in national elections and referenda where it doesn't like the answer given on the ballot paper....the EU is such a paragon of democracy isn't it... "you can have a free vote on the matter as long as you give us the answer we want!"

In the other EU thread, I asked what action the EU had actually taken in these instances, but didn't receive an answer. So I'll ask again.

 

[HH]

well, apart from the lessons of history showing us what happens if a disproportionately large army arises in Europe...

the problem I have with an EU army controlled by the EU bureaucrats is a simple one... as it stands the UK has control of it's army... that army can only go into combat on the say so of our Government who, I would hope, would only send our forces into battle if it is in our nation's best interests. However, if the only army we have is controlled by the EU then conceivably "our" forces could be ordered to fight a war that is AGAINST the interests of the UK... it goes back to that "s" word.... sovereignty... or to put it another way... self determination. Strange how so many remainers believe in the ideal of self determination.... until it comes to our country protecting it's right to self determination!

I am aghast that you can possibly believe that the Government only sends our forces into battle if it is our nation's best interests. How was Afghanistan in our best interests? Iraq?

Meanwhile, I await you telling me the lessons of history in the shape of drawing any parallel between Hitler, Stalin or even Napoleon and the EU. I'm no Juncker fan, but I really can't see him goose-stepping at the head of the EU Army.

 

[EM2]

the deal on the table is Brexit in name only.

That is all we are entitled to. For everything else, the UK has to convince 27 other member states that what the UK proposes is in the best interests of them all. They haven't done that.
Of course, the UK could walk away. But the fact that they haven't done that suggests that they think it would be a very, very, bad idea.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

In the other EU thread, I asked what action the EU had actually taken in these instances, but didn't receive an answer. So I'll ask again.

good grief! Italy? elected a PM the EU didn't like... so was told to choose another one... Greece.. elected a government that had a budget the EU didn't like... told to try again... Ireland and {IIRC} Denmark had referendums that gave the "wrong" answer told by EU to re-run the referendum.
Of course I'm sure that someone will pipe up that it's all "fake news"

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

That is all we are entitled to. For everything else, the UK has to convince 27 other member states that what the UK proposes is in the best interests of them all. They haven't done that.
Of course, the UK could walk away. But the fact that they haven't done that suggests that they think it would be a very, very, bad idea.

the problem is that the UK can't just walk away for 2 good reasons... 1. our incompetent government has done nothing to prepare for crashing out with a deal due to their arrogance in believing that they would get a one sided deal in our favour and 2. TM ruled out a no-deal brexit on day 1... therefore our negotiators had to negotiate with one arm tied behind their back! to go for a no-deal brexit now would rob her and her party of any shred of credibility they still have both at home and abroad

 

[Howardh]

You mean give into the bullying of the EU? and that fulfills the will of the people how exactly?

Jobs, growth, freedom, rights, efficiency, funding, reduction of red tape, security, opportunity.
Not a lot really to be fair.

 

[HH]

Loads of Brexit Tories have had a chance to get a better deal and failed. You might think that would shut them up. But no, having failed, they resign and then snipe from the sidelines. I have to say that I feel sorry for the Maybot - she will go down in history as a sad, Chamberlain-like figure, who will step off the plane clutching her equally useless piece of paper. Unfortunately, there is no Churchill to save us this time - we have Anthony Eden and Alec Douglas-Home...

 

[Howardh]

the problem is that the UK can't just walk away for 2 good reasons... 1. our incompetent government has done nothing to prepare for crashing out with a deal due to their arrogance in believing that they would get a one sided deal in our favour and 2. TM ruled out a no-deal brexit on day 1... therefore our negotiators had to negotiate with one arm tied behind their back! to go for a no-deal brexit now would rob her and her party of any shred of credibility they still have both at home and abroad

Be honest, when you voted you knew who the government was - and they don't have the best of records about organising anything (from HS2 to Universal Credit to NHS systems....) The warning bells should have rung then - although they did give you the chance to vote them out in '17 (another thing they couldn't organise).

With hindsight, wouldn't it have been better to do the negotiation first and THEN put it to the public? Might have twisted a few arms to do it properly.

 

[EM2]

good grief! Italy? elected a PM the EU didn't like... so was told to choose another one...

Link? A search for 'Italian PM vetoed by EU' doesn't produce any results.

Greece.. elected a government that had a budget the EU didn't like... told to try again...

Because there was no way in that budget for Greece to pay back what it owed, and that's what got them in trouble in the first place!

Ireland and {IIRC} Denmark had referendums that gave the "wrong" answer told by EU to re-run the referendum.
Of course I'm sure that someone will pipe up that it's all "fake news"

Not true. The EU asked both countries what reasons had been given by the electorates for the results. Both countries then renegotiated the treaties with the EU, and after that went back to their electorates.

 

[EM2]

the problem is that the UK can't just walk away for 2 good reasons... 1. our incompetent government has done nothing to prepare for crashing out with a deal due to their arrogance in believing that they would get a one sided deal in our favour and 2. TM ruled out a no-deal brexit on day 1... therefore our negotiators had to negotiate with one arm tied behind their back! to go for a no-deal brexit now would rob her and her party of any shred of credibility they still have both at home and abroad

But that's not the EU's fault, is it?

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Be honest, when you voted you knew who the government was - and they don't have the best of records about organising anything (from HS2 to Universal Credit to NHS systems....) The warning bells should have rung then - although they did give you the chance to vote them out in '17 (another thing they couldn't organise).

With hindsight, wouldn't it have been better to do the negotiation first and THEN put it to the public? Might have twisted a few arms to do it properly.

well I did take the opportunity to try and change the government... though let's be honest... if there had been a credible opposition leader I doubt TM would've risked it... the fact that Corbyn came so close is a damning indictment of the government we have in place.

as to the hindsight... negotiate first? isn't that what Cameron did? he went to Brussels, negotiated, came back and said "this is what I got, do you want to stay in the EU."

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

But that's not the EU's fault, is it?

I didn't say it was

 

[EM2]

I didn't say it was

So why are you blaming them for negotiating a deal which is in their best interests, when their opponents are so monumentally useless?
As the old sporting adage goes 'you can only play what's in front of you', and there aren't many that will tell an opponent that what they are doing is a really bad idea!

 

[dcbwhaley]

well, apart from the lessons of history showing us what happens if a disproportionately large army arises in Europe...

the problem I have with an EU army controlled by the EU bureaucrats is a simple one... as it stands the UK has control of it's army... that army can only go into combat on the say so of our Government who, I would hope, would only send our forces into battle if it is in our nation's best interests. However, if the only army we have is controlled by the EU then conceivably "our" forces could be ordered to fight a war that is AGAINST the interests of the UK... it goes back to that "s" word.... sovereignty... or to put it another way... self determination. Strange how so many remainers believe in the ideal of self determination.... until it comes to our country protecting it's right to self determination!

But our forces have been sent into action against the countries best interests. Blair sent troops to Iraq for no good reason. I suppose that you could argue that he did so to maintain the "special relationship" with the USA but that is be a surrendering of our sovereignty.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

So why are you blaming them for negotiating a deal which is in their best interests, when their opponents are so monumentally useless?
As the old sporting adage goes 'you can only play what's in front of you', and there aren't many that will tell an opponent that what they are doing is a really bad idea!

aha so you agree with me that this deal is bad for the UK? that we will be tied even closer to Europe with even less say?

I've posed this question before... as a remainer what would you think would be the best deal that would deliver Brexit? what is it you want if you have to leave the EU? forget all the protests about it's a Brexiteers mess to clean up. Whatever happens in March it will affect us all equally good or bad... no matter how you voted in the referendum. In other words if you had to negotiate Brexit what would your demands be?

FWIW the deal I hoped for would be one that took us back to pre-Maastricht.. ie a purely trading partnership... and if we have to pay cash for that then we get a say as to what those trading rules will be. As to free movement... I have no problem with free movement of goods... that's eminently sensible.... but I also think that it's eminently sensible that free movement of people needs urgent reform... as it stands you can commit murder in Poland...serve your sentence... and then move to the UK and there is absolutely no way of stopping them from doing so as they are EU nationals so have the right to settle here.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

But our forces have been sent into action against the countries best interests. Blair sent troops to Iraq for no good reason. I suppose that you could argue that he did so to maintain the "special relationship" with the USA but that is be a surrendering of our sovereignty.

well, I'll be honest.... as soon as I posted the comment I suddenly remembered that Blair had destroyed our faith in our politicians to go to war in our interests.... but then again we should've known he was a liar... he smiled too much

 

[EM2]

aha so you agree with me that this deal is bad for the UK? that we will be tied even closer to Europe with even less say?

Any deal that gives us less than we have now will be bad for the UK.

I've posed this question before... as a remainer what would you think would be the best deal that would deliver Brexit? what is it you want if you have to leave the EU?

I answered it before, too. Norway deal, please.

 

[HH]

But our forces have been sent into action against the countries best interests. Blair sent troops to Iraq for no good reason. I suppose that you could argue that he did so to maintain the "special relationship" with the USA but that is be a surrendering of our sovereignty.

I made a similar comment. Still awaiting a response, which should make interesting reading.

P.S. I should state a personal interest here, as my brother-in-law served in Iraq (and Afghanistan).

 

[HH]

well, I'll be honest.... as soon as I posted the comment I suddenly remembered that Blair had destroyed our faith in our politicians to go to war in our interests.... but then again we should've known he was a liar... he smiled too much

Certainly something we can't accuse May of. Farage on the other hand...

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Any deal that gives us less than we have now will be bad for the UK.

I answered it before, too. Norway deal, please.

strangely that's not too far from what I would like... with the exception of the Schengen membership of course also if we were to stay part of any agencies {such as the EDA and Interpol} I would want us to have equal voting rights with all other member states of the agencies... especially if we are expected to pay into said agencies.

Of course the Norway deal explodes the myth peddled by the EU and certain of the more rabid remainiacs that you can't pick and choose which bits you belong to. OK so Norway's never actually joined the EU but it's been allowed to pick and choose which bits it DOES join.

For me it is basically back to the EEC pre-Maastricht.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Certainly something we can't accuse May of. Farage on the other hand...

No May just looks plain grim... she looks like she's 6'4 and just got out of the car after an 8hr drive in a mini!.. in fact any day now I'm expecting her to burst into tears on camera and scream "why did I ever put my name down for leader?"

 

[HH]

I think most of us would go for a pick and choose deal, even if we wouldn't necessarily pick all the same things. For instance, despite having been a committed European for nearly 60 years (I started young), I wouldn't want to join the Euro, because it doesn't work as it currently stands. OTOH the thought of a European Army doesn't fill me full of fear - I think it might Vladimir Putin though. And he financed Brexit.

I am not actually an advocate of untrammelled immigration, because I think we have too many people in the country already. France has far more land area than us (about 250% of our size), but a very similar population, for example. However, I don't believe that European immigration is really that big a problem - maybe a few rules needed changing, but that could have been achieved. We just seem to have been very bad at diplomacy with the EU block during this whole Tory period (not that I imagine for one second that Corbyn would have been brilliant).

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

maybe a few rules needed changing, but that could have been achieved. We just seem to have been very bad at diplomacy with the EU block during this whole Tory period (not that I imagine for one second that Corbyn would have been brilliant).

The previous Tory period wasn't any better was it? Problem Cameron had though was he's no Maggie!

 

[Esker-pades]

or that Angela Merkel would open the floodgates to "refugees"...

Of course the one risk that the Remain campaign forgot to mention was that the vote might be pointless because if we vote to leave the EU will not let us leave.... as proved by the "deal" which will leave us tied even closer to Europe.... AND robs us of the right to break free from it's shackles... come on remainers... do you think the EU will EVER agree to let us out of the "backstop"... if you do then you are exactly what you accuse the leavers of being....NAIVE

Then the question must be: How would you prevent a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, between Northern Ireland and Great Britain and have different customs law on either side?
What would your deal look like? Is it feasible?

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Then the question must be: How would you prevent a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, between Northern Ireland and Great Britain and have different customs law on either side?
What would your deal look like? Is it feasible?

I don't propose different customs law... I propose a pre- Maastricht EEC style agreement... ie purely trade

 

[Mvann]

And George soros, who made his money by getting sterling out of the exchange rate mechanism, has decided to put money into trying to keep Britain in the EU. Wonder how much money he will make off that.

On a different note, has anybody noticed how much stuff from the EU has started to appear on their Facebook page and twitter account

 

[hooverboy]

And George soros, who made his money by getting sterling out of the exchange rate mechanism, has decided to put money into trying to keep Britain in the EU. Wonder how much money he will make off that.

On a different note, has anybody noticed how much stuff from the EU has started to appear on their Facebook page and twitter account

and just you wait and see how uncle sam deals with his funding of antifa.
..and the stake in voting machines
..and the caravan
soros is a marked man. I think technically he is a registered US citizen, so treason/sedition charges are very likely.

 

[Mvann]

Well Hungary don't want him back