Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It's still rational economically. EU political unity is good for business.
That's a good point

The more Remainers are honest about the simple and undeniable fact that Remaining = increasing levels of - eventually total Economic, Financial and Political union the better

So much more preferable than the prevarication of talking about opt-outs, vetoes that will be shortly irrelevant
 
WTF?????

Trump was appointed when?

The majority of UK citizens have been advocating for a referendum since when?

Oh - sorry - I forgot the narrative.....

Identify something bad - in this case Trump - associate that to Brexit and job done - quite sad , but well done
That’s called doubling down when you’ve made a fool of yourself already.
 
Different aims. NATO to be the West against the East and the EU explicitly to create economic and political ties that would make war between western European nations just too costly. But some people don't like those political aims and seem to think economic rivalry is a way to preserve peace.
That's a good point

The more Remainers are honest about the simple and undeniable fact that Remaining = increasing levels of - eventually total Economic, Financial and Political union the better

So much more preferable than the prevarication of talking about opt-outs, vetoes that will be shortly irrelevant
 
Hunt has announced precisely that although it’s called a European Maritime Protection force. Will coordinate with any US response but is to remain seperate from the US.

It’s a solid move and Labour have backed it as well.
That's a good point

The more Remainers are honest about the simple and undeniable fact that Remaining = increasing levels of - eventually total Economic, Financial and Political union the better

So much more preferable than the prevarication of talking about opt-outs, vetoes that will be shortly irrelevant

Oh well - I will give up on pointing out the truth of what you guys have denied for so long - seeing as you are now being open about it
 
I'm baffled. You were fighting against May's deal. Against other Leavers.

What you mean is that we should all be fighting for the shit of No Deal.

No chance. (There's no mandate for that.)
I have never been fighting against other (genuine) leavers - you are just being silly and playing silly games
 
Such hypocrisy.
Such lack of basic comprehension

This is supposed to be a new start thread - why to you keep exposing yourself to be someone that needs to be always making cheap/snide one-liners?

Just give it up mate and please adhere to the request from Ric to stop such provocative shit
 
Practice what you preach then.

How many times have you said in here you’d rather remain than take the Withdrawal Agreement?

If the mandate is to just leave and what’s next is consequences then you’re completely and utterly contradicting yourself.

A battle already lost? What’s already lost?

The best outcome is to avoid no deal at all costs but we’re heading there because of the extremists in the Tory Party.
?? sorry - I have tried to make sense of that and failed - given the context of the posts over the last days and weeks

1/ "How many times have you said in here you’d rather remain than take the Withdrawal Agreement?"

Fucking loads and I am resolute in that opinion

2/ "If the mandate is to just leave and what’s next is consequences then you’re completely and utterly contradicting yourself."

You are simply inventing/talking bollocks I am afraid.

I have only yesterday admitted/accepted that if the WA had been signed off by the HoC I would have to accept that that - annoyingly - it delivers against the mandate

And so on...….

Please try and resist the desire to leap in and make cheap shots when they do not stack up - let's keep the thread on topic, factual and civil
 
?? sorry - I have tried to make sense of that and failed - given the context of the posts over the last days and weeks

1/ "How many times have you said in here you’d rather remain than take the Withdrawal Agreement?"

Fucking loads and I am resolute in that opinion

2/ "If the mandate is to just leave and what’s next is consequences then you’re completely and utterly contradicting yourself."

You are simply inventing/talking bollocks I am afraid I have only yesterday admitted/accepted that if the WA had been signed off by the HoC I would have to accept that that - annoyingly - delivers against the mandate

And so on...….

Please try and resist the desire to leap in and make cheap shots when they do not stack up - let's keep the thread on topic, factual and civil

You said the mandate is to leave.

You said anything else is just a consequence.

Whether that’s May’s deal or No Deal.

These are your words so if May’s deal is a consequence of that mandate then get on with it.

But now you’re saying it goes against it.

You’re all over the place tonight.
 
Ah, the enemies of the people. Traitors. And you moan about being insulted.
Sorry - that is a waaaaay too big a leap to take things out of context - even for you

My comment was clearly about the EU project architects - you associate it to the old Daily Mail article

A clear fail and disappointingly cheap shot - keep it civil and sensible mate please
 
Well- strictly IMO- don’t be fucking cheeky.

I do perfectly understand it and have explained it to you before.

You don’t like it because of the backstop but the backstop is the only way out of the mess that is Brexit, if we want to leave the Customs Union and retain the GFA.

Now we’ve had this for 48 ours about the GFA and leave supporters on the forum eventually backed off giving alternatives so it’s up to you if you fancy another go.
Sorry - I will bow out

I spent 20mins reading 15 pages this morning that absolutely demonstrated your obsession and blinkedness with regard to the GFA and backstop - that gave me sufficient insight to the veracity of your views on the subject
 
That’s called doubling down when you’ve made a fool of yourself already.
You looking in a mirror?

Anyway - cut out the personal stuff please - you seem to want to provoke all the time and we have been requested to cut that out, but you do not seem to be able to
 
Sorry - I will bow out

I spent 20mins reading 15 pages this morning that absolutely demonstrated your obsession and blinkedness with regard to the GFA and backstop - that gave me sufficient insight to the veracity of your views on the subject

Lol

That obsession about the GFA and the backstop is absolutely justified and exactly why we haven’t left and it’s the only thing stopping you getting what you want.

It’s astonishing you don’t take it more seriously.

It’s far and away the most important aspect of getting a Withdrawal Agreement through.

It’s also very telling that you wish to move the debate away from it and your only alternative is to say “we need more good will”.

There’s no detail from Leavers on how to get around it, there’s no clear answer how to negate the issue.

If there was then the backstop wouldn’t matter a jot, because we’d be able to immediately get rid of it upon leaving anyway.

A crucial point often missed is that it’s only there until the solution is found, so if you have the solution you better do more of that consultancy work with the government so they can pass the Withdrawal Agreement.
 
You said the mandate is to leave.

You said anything else is just a consequence.

Whether that’s May’s deal or No Deal.

These are your words so if May’s deal is a consequence of that mandate then get on with it.

But now you’re saying it goes against it.

You’re all over the place tonight.
That is a really mad post - try thinking if what you actually post is what you actually mean to say:

"Whether that’s May’s deal or No Deal.
These are your words so if May’s deal is a consequence of that mandate then get on with it."

Yes - Bravo - spot on - now think it through - let me help

If May's deal had been voted through - no matter how much I would have been disgusted - I would have to have accepted...…

This is what I was saying rather that what you wish to think that I was saying

That is because whatever deal or no-deal results from the situation it is a consequence of the negotiations. The simple and unavoidable truth is that the mandate is to LEAVE the EU
 
Lol

That obsession about the GFA and the backstop is absolutely justified and exactly why we haven’t left and it’s the only thing stopping you getting what you want.

It’s astonishing you don’t take it more seriously.

It’s far and away the most important aspect of getting a Withdrawal Agreement through.

It’s also very telling that you wish to move the debate away from it and your only alternative is to say “we need more good will”.

There’s no detail from Leavers on how to get around it, there’s no clear answer how to negate the issue.

If there was then the backstop wouldn’t matter a jot, because we’d be able to immediately get rid of it upon leaving anyway.

A crucial point often missed is that it’s only there until the solution is found, so if you have the solution you better do more of that consultancy work with the government so they can pass the Withdrawal Agreement.
Sorry - to save you making more posts - I stopped reading after the first line

You may think that speaks badly about me, but as I said:

"I spent 20mins reading 15 pages this morning that absolutely demonstrated your obsession and blinkedness with regard to the GFA and backstop - that gave me sufficient insight to the veracity of your views on the subject.."

I do not feel the need for more insights
 
That is a really mad post - try thinking if what you actually post is what you actually mean to say:

"Whether that’s May’s deal or No Deal.
These are your words so if May’s deal is a consequence of that mandate then get on with it."

Yes - Bravo - spot on - now think it through - let me help

If May's deal had been voted through - no matter how much I would have been disgusted - I would have to have accepted...…

This is what I was saying rather that what you wish to think that I was saying

That is because whatever deal or no-deal results from the situation it is a consequence of the negotiations. The simple and unavoidable truth is that the mandate is to LEAVE the EU

So does May’s deal honour that mandate or not?

You’ve said both tonight.

No Deal doesn’t have a majority in the House and never will, that’s been clear on every vote. It’s less popular than the Withdrawal Agreement...

So where does that leave us? (No pun intended).
 
Sorry - to save you making more posts - I stopped reading after the first line

You may think that speaks badly about me, but as I said:

"I spent 20mins reading 15 pages this morning that absolutely demonstrated your obsession and blinkedness with regard to the GFA and backstop - that gave me sufficient insight to the veracity of your views on the subject.."

I do not feel the need for more insights

No of course you don’t want to talk about the GFA and backstop because you cannot come back on it.

You’ve spent tonight reading 15 pages of posts from me but when it comes to responding with a reasonable alternative, you choose to stop at that point.

Telling.
 
Yep - how can this be so docilely misunderstood?

For a start, he didn't say "heavy price".

"The United Kingdom would like to leave but without paying the consequences. It's not possible", insists the president. "We are not going to remain ambiguous. We must go to the conclusion of the will of the British to leave the Union. There must be a price, a threat, a risk, otherwise there will be others who want to go out. We must defend our conception of Europe based on the four freedoms. "

Seems fair enough.
Change locally at your destination mate - far better - 110 in Cyprus today
Well there's a thing. 130 before the referendum. Revoke. Far better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top