Ignores political realities to make that “graph.”Nice deflection.
Ignores political realities to make that “graph.”
And, I’m not saying that is one-sided. The fact that there is a competing political EU interest is the point!
It was meant to be a trading bloc, not a political homogenization of different peoples with vastly different histories being shoehorned into Northern European political imperatives.
You are ignoring the point that our current relationship with the EU is not dictated to by the EU in some vindictive reaction to the vote. It’s not it’s entirely down to choices made by the UK government from the choices offered to the UK by the EU. So if it causes problems for the UK, and I believe it does, then it’s down to the UK government to reassess and improve the relationship, which it is doing now with a new government.Not enough or quick enough for me, but at least it realises the best direction of travel.Ignores political realities to make that “graph.”
And, I’m not saying that is one-sided. The fact that there is a competing political EU interest is the point!
It was meant to be a trading bloc, not a political homogenization of different peoples with vastly different histories being shoehorned into Northern European political imperatives.
I never said the ultimatum wasn’t based on what the UK wanted, merely that it was not on terms the EU would approve.You're just ranting incoherently now. You claimed there was an ultimatum, that's simply not true. We chose our position. We don't have play the victim here, we made our choices.
Exactly! The EU wasn’t, but the two stepping stones to get there? Were they failures or just stepping stones laid out for all to follow? What was wrong with the simple notion of “Common Market”? Was tariff-free trade and the reduction in bureaucratic red tape such a bad thing? Why did it have to become a centrally controlled political bureaucracy?The EU was never just a trading bloc, it was always envisaged as a means to cement peace, and that was always clear right from before we joined. You may or may not like that, but it is the reality.
I hope I haven’t caused that sentiment? I have enjoyed your discussion.Anyway, I knew I should never have commented here, so that's me out.
Happy New Year to you!Happy New Year blues!
Pedantics, pedantics , pedantics .The tide doesn’t come in and out!
The water stays where it is and the earth rotates underneath it!
How could they ever be, especially in today’s world?Trade and politics are not separate!
I thought it was an interesting perspective on an otherwise “common knowledge” point.Pedantics, pedantics , pedantics .
Because of the moon’s gravitational pull there is a bulge of water at the nearest and farthest points from the moon.
This in effect causes a massive wave of water which when it reaches a coast causes a high tide. So relative to the land the tide does come in and go out.
Explain it your way or mine, neither way takes away from the point he was making.
It’s not the separation that’s in question, but how they are connected. Subjugation or cooperation?Trade and politics are not separate!
Well when you put it that way, perhaps.I thought it was an interesting perspective on an otherwise “common knowledge” point.
One man’s pedantry appears to be another man’s interesting point of science meant to stimulate, not suppress, thought.
To be fair King Canute never tried to stop the tides he was trying to prove he couldn’t control the elements unlike god.Well when you put it that way, perhaps.
How you worded it sounded like a denial of his substantive point of the futility of trying to solve Brexit being akin to trying to stop the tides.
After all I think King Kanute tried that ahead of you and got nowhere.