madscoob

iTrader: (3)

JUST GET US OUT

406 constituencies voted Leave 242 remain

263 voting areas voted Leave 119 remain

Labour seats 148 Leave 84 remain

Tory seats 247 Leave 80 remain

MPs personal votes 248 Leave 400 remain.

It’s MPs that are the problem

Mr Fuji

Because the MPs know what a disaster leaving is. That said, I do think they should have been more honest up front and voted against having the referendum. Thatcher had it right, we elect the govt to make the decisions, not have referenda.

trails

iTrader: (41)

This in spades.

Today should be interesting..

BMWhere?

Perhaps you should read the disclaimer above those figures you quoted from Wikipedia. There is no reliable constituency data for the result.

Then there is this... https://www.theguardian.com/politics...itch-to-remain

There is also the fact that in the last election, the people voted for more MPs who supported remain than Leave. The people picked those MPs after the referendum knowing how they voted. The people spoke in the last election and voted for a parliament that doesn't support Brexit, at least not the hard Brexit that TM envisaged! Given it was a hung parliament, the people clearly said they wanted a cross party solution for Brexit. Instead, TM fudged a dodgy deal with the DUP and chose to ignore everyone else and do her own thing. The problem is not MPs, the problem is the PM who refuses to listen. Now it's parliament that is taking back control from the government and maybe finally we can start to deal with Brexit more sensibly in a way which takes everyone's opinion into account!

JTaylor

Mr Fuji

There is, cancel Article 50

JTaylor

Mr Fuji

We already have catastrophic division, and it would appear that remain is the favoured option amongst the populace, so it would devastate democracy not to put it to the country again........

trails

iTrader: (41)

However this turns out it's going to polarise opinion...so we have to accept that somebody is going to be pi55ed. In which case lets be pragmatic and choose the solution that does least harm across the board; cancel Brexit.

JackClark

May should cancel Brexit, call an election and resign.

trails

iTrader: (41)

Then the conspiracy theorists can say that's what she planned all along...and history can call her a saviour. Maybe.

JackClark

Yup and the Brexiteers can go back to voting for UKIP.

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

dpb

Theyre just confused

trails

iTrader: (41)

Fixed that for you

JackClark

Slightly off topic but it seems like Christmas was only last week yet here we are at the end of May.

trails

iTrader: (41)

boom-tish.

dazdavies

iTrader: (22)

Conceited people like Jack haven't the capacity to think that some of us leavers aren't racist UKIP voters or that some of us have thought a great deal about this and have followed it all quite closely since the referendum was called.

Nope, according to people like Jack we're all thick neanderthal racists that haven't got a clue.

I had a debate with a remainer on Facebook the other day. His argument was that he was worried about not being able to retire to Europe or that his holidays there being affected.
When I pointed out that there's far more at stake than His retirement and HIS holidays he started with the insults.

That bigoted blinkered crap cuts both ways but some of you are way too arrogant to see the argument from both sides.

I personally think May has done a dreadful job of the negotiations so much so that I dare say it's probably been done deliberately.

Corbyn thinks he can negotiate a better deal which I find laughable the man is an idiot that would ruin this country quick sharp.

I cannot believe people are wanting May to discount a no Deal scenario. That's the only leverage we have over the EU. Taking that away is like sending a soldier into battle but telling him to leave is ammunition at home. As soon as the enemy finds that out they walk all over that poor soldier.

If you're not willing to get bloody you've lost before you start.

If the EU really do think a no deal is going to happen they might just move on the backstop issue because quite frankly that is the only thing from stopping Mays deal which I hate to say is the best deal that anyone is going to get.

Lets not forget than when people voted for the EU it was for a trading Union, not this European super state with it's own army bo11ocks.

dpb

So you would have said /done nothing from the referendum all the way till brexit day ??

BMWhere?

I can't see the EU moving on the deal without anything new from the UK side. As far as the EU is concerned, with the red lines that Theresa May has drawn, that is the deal. I agree its the best deal that we could get with TM's red lines, but its a pretty terrible deal and far worse than just staying in the EU.

The threat of no deal sounds like a great bargaining chip, and no deal is better than a bad deal is a great catch-phrase, but the reality is, that we would suffer more from no deal than the EU will and they a very well aware of that. If anything, Theresa Mays deal shows that no deal is better than a bad deal was just talk, because her deal was a bad deal and yet still better than no deal.

To use your battle analogy, its like our troops blowing themselves up on the front line while the enemy looks on just laughing. Perhaps one or two might get shrapnel injuries, but we just pointlessly killed ourselves!

I'm glad TM didn't lose the vote of no confidence yesterday as Corbyn would be a complete disaster, not just for Brexit but generally for the country. The next week or two will be pretty critical in deciding what happens next. I'm not entirely convinced TM is serious about finding cross party consensus and Corbyn is being an idiot by refusing to co-operate. It seems TM is only really interested in keeping her current deal and hoping the EU will back down on the backstop, but that's never going to happen and even if she gets the backing of DUP and the Brexiteers, she's still not going to get the deal through parliament anyway. If she wants to get anything through parliament, she has to get the remainers on side, even if she loses all brexiteer votes, the remain voters have the numbers. I suspect parliament shall continue to take back control from the government and we'll see something lke a Norway deal or a second referendum to resolve the parliamentary deadlock.

^Qwerty^

Even yesterday the Spanish PM(?) made calls for a true European Army. That's a step too far for me and I don't see a requirement for it, but for those who claim a EU Sovereign state will never happen, getting an Army that operates for the EU is a big step toward that happening. Having your own armed forces and government is generally what defines you as a country or not.

Mr Fuji

Obviously there are plenty of people who voted leave who are not thick, or racist, but I also think it's fair to say that probably all racists will have voted leave. It's an easy, if improper, generalisation to make, but let's be honest, both side throw the insults.

I suppose the problem is that leave or remain, it boils down to what people think it will affect for them. I agree that his view seems rather petty, but only as petty as people voting to leave because they lost job they had quoted for to some Polish builders, but in the greater scheme of things Polish builders were a huge boost to the economy etc etc. Or, someone voting remain because they export 80% of their stuff to France, but leaving the EU would benefit 80% of UK businesses, etc etc. It's the nature of people. It's hard to see the bigger picture, sometimes.

I don't think you're far wrong, but as time goes on, I do actually think she has become blinkered to this deal, and is still trying to force it, despite supposed cross party talks.

You'll find no disagreement from me there

But no deal is such a disaster that Parliament will do anything to stop it, so it's not really a bargaining position at all, the EU know we don't want it. They are prepared for it, and although it will hurt them too, not half as much as it will hurt us! No deal really does need to be got rid of, let the adults get on with sorting a Brexit that doesn't kill us, or stop it altogether (but not without going to the people, as much as I would love to remain, it would be a travesty to simply renege on the result of a democratic vote)

Nobody voted for the EU, we voted for the EEC But, this notion that the EU has been foisted upon us by the evil, corrupt beaurocrats is tosh, the successive governments we have voted for have agreed to each step. I have said before, we have elected leaders to make these decisions for us, for the better of the country as a whole, and they did, and they could have vetoed these decisions, or started the process to leave if they thought it was not. That in itself, should tell you all you need to know.

Mr Fuji

https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commenta...sunderstanding

trails

iTrader: (41)

good post, full of facts and common sense

BMWhere?

The European Army concept is an interesting idea that certainly warrants some discussion.

On one side, the British Army is really world class in its effectiveness despite limited resources. There is certainly an argument that a European Army wouldn't be as good as the British Army and language/cultural barriers could hinder its effectiveness. Although currently the British Army currently remains very effective when collaborating with other Armies under NATO or other defense collaborations, but still I've heard many complaints from both British and German Army friends about certain other countries Armies.

On the other side of the argument, the collective defense spending in the EU is about about 1/3 of the US budget, but the overall capability is far less than that due to duplication of resources. For example, instead of individually building a dozen small/medium sized aircraft carriers, we could together build half a dozen super carriers. Collectively we have an over-capacity of smaller/cheaper equipment, yet an under-capacity in larger equipment which could increase our capabilities on a global scale. By pooling our resources, we can equip an single European Army far more effectively than each country having its own separate Army. Utilising the training of the British Army accross the EU, we could together easily be a match against the US even with 1/3 of the budget, not to mention China or Russia.

In the context of Brexit we also need to be concerned about a European Army that we are not part of. Currently, we have certainly the best Army in Europe, but after we leave, if the EU does create a common Army, then it is unlikely that we will be a match against the combined EU force. We like to make references back to WW2 and how the European Army couldn't defeat us, but don't forget that it was only really the German Army with a little help from Italy that we were fighting (in Europe) and we needed a lot of help from the US, Russia, all the countries of the British Empire and many other European soldiers who had managed to escape to the UK, in particular the Polish.

To be honest, I'm a bit torn on the argument. I can see both sides, but also maybe nostalgia is a big part of wanting to keep an independent British Army. One thing for sure is, if we remained in the EU, the UK could certainly still decide if it wanted to participate in a single army or remain independent. Just because the EU creates a single Army, doesn't mean that every country has to participate. In the same way that the UK didn't join the Euro or sign up to the Schengen open border agreement, we could stay out of the European Army if we don't want it, so its not a valid reason to leave the EU. One thing that is often forgotten in the EU debate is that nothing is ever forced on us without our agreement in the first case. Don't forget we originally signed up for the Euro, the ECB was originally planned for London, but we pulled out of the Euro following black Wednesday in 1992 and the ECB went to Frankfurt.

JackClark

You don't have to be a racist to vote for Brexit, but if you are you probably did.

^Qwerty^

Good post that. I'm a bit torn for similar reasons. What concerns me most though is who makes the decision to use it if/when it does exist? That could potentially be a bigger bureaucratic nightmare than anything we've ever seen and make Brexit look like a walk in the park. Too many countries with different interests to make it work and we can see only too well how paralysis sets in when that happens.

Mr Fuji

Indeed, and this is something you oft hear touted, that we beat a European army once etc, etc, but in reality, the BEF (and our allies) was soundly beaten by the Wehrmacht. Even our victory in the Battle of Britain just meant we could hold on until the US stepped in to help.

The British army is indeed a fine fighting force, but it wouldn't be able to defeat a combined European force, but it's all pointless conjecture, I don't ever see that situation arising.

Anyway, I imagine that a European army, if it ever came to pass, would be more akin to NATO than actually having permanent regiments etc. It may have some standardisation of equipment, which would actually be a good thing. Eurofighter, is, after all, one of the finest aircraft ever made, and it was not made by one country.

An0n0m0us

Well said.

I'm for a no deal and call the EU's bluff because that exactly what it is. They have gone down the road of bullying the UK into a deal that was never going to succeed. They have played a poor poker hand and it's time to call them on it. The EU will be much worse off than us if they wanted to lock the UK out trading with them. Not to mention just how much of Europe relies on UK tourism and the money that brings them I find it laughable that anybody falls for the EU saying how bad it would be for the UK.

Martin2005

There's not going to be an EU army. It's just politics.