EU. In or out?

[Jak*]

The beginning of Don’s post certainly reads as if it is personal, however you are right politics should be about listening to the arguments and trying to ignore the personalities.
The impact of Brexit is personal, unless you are a billionaire you will almost certainly be financially worse off. The country has already lost more money through Brexit in the last four years than we paid in total into the EU. We have already lost some of the freedoms we have and stand to lose more. Those Brits living in the EU and those who enjoy travelling over there, stand to lose more than the rest, therefore we find it a little bit tedious and slightly worrying that, after four years, the best argument for Brexit is that a slim majority voted for it. I would hope that if the Remain side had won I would be able to console those who had voted to Leave with some positive arguments for staying in.

[Asgard]

Brexiters did a lot of rejoicing actually, as you know. There was lots of "you lost so shut up" talk, although that's mysteriously died down a bit lately!

Shut Up...You Lost

[dave h]

The EU was always going to put us on the naughty step or at least try,

The EU has done no such thing. It has tried its hardest all along to minimise the pain of brexit for both sides. Brexit is a lose-lose scenario so the best you can do is reduce the damage if you can. If the UK finds itself wearing a dunce's hat in naughty corner that's entirely self-inflicted.

It's never going to go smoothly anyone who thought that is a right spastic,

Except that every pro-brexit voice at the time of the referendum and for a fair time afterwards told the UK public that the process would be easy and bring enormous benefits. 52% of those who voted chose to believe them. So, in your words, that's a hell of a lot of 'spastics'.

We will survive one way or another covid ain't helping but shit happens,

So now the best the british public can hope for out of brexit is 'survival'. Wow, the bar really has been lowered hasn't it.

No one's rejoicing for winning the yes or no brexit deal but that was that,

Brexiters did a lot of rejoicing actually, as you know. There was lots of "you lost so shut up" talk, although that's mysteriously died down a bit lately!

Some don't have to rub salt in the wound,

So now it's being accepted that brexit is a 'wound'. What a strange thing for a country to want for itself.

I still think if the vote was put it would be the same outcome,

Evidence from most recent polls suggests otherwise.

slightly misinterpreted my quotes there Dave but I guess all's fair in love and politics

Dave.

[Brenhden]

Brexiters did a lot of rejoicing actually, as you know. There was lots of "you lost so shut up" talk, although that's mysteriously died down a bit lately!

Shut Up...You Lost

Ha

And in deference to your signature:
You ain't leadin' but two things right now: Jack and shit... and Jack left town.

[mikedefieslife]

New Dunkirk to Rosslare ferry route to open, in order to bypass brexit England. So DFDS are confident enough that the delays at English ports from next year will make it more attractive to spend 24 hours on a ferry puking all the way around Cornwall than to sit in the england to eire landbridge queues.

https://www.thejournal.ie/rosslare-dunk ... FDnWLnslSg

Longer ferry trips can be much better in some regards. You get a longer break from driving. More comfort and amenities as the boats are usually larger, and a cabin to get a decent night’s sleep in.

I reckon I’ll be using the route at some point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[catcitrus]

I see they are rioting and burning cars in Paris again over more "police state" legislation--and Macaroon has vowed to VITO anything that doesn't give the French unlimited fishing rights for 10 years--and we are going to cosy up to him after all this time!!!---I think his attitude is clear--back to the 100 years war!

[Elmer J Fudd]

I see they are rioting and burning cars in Paris again over more "police state" legislation--and Macaroon has vowed to VITO anything that doesn't give the French unlimited fishing rights for 10 years--and we are going to cosy up to him after all this time!!!---I think his attitude is clear--back to the 100 years war!

I wish we had the gumption to protest the way the French do; democracy isn't about sitting at home and allowing your Gov't to remove your rights, it is about showing the Gov't support where the do the right thing and dissention when they do the wrong thing. Destruction of property is usually carried out by extremists stirring up trouble (as is the case in the UK).


Unlimited fishing rights for 10 years is not actually true.

What the EU wants is a 10 year transition period where the transfer of fishing rights and quotas can be manged. If (probably when) we leave without a deal the licences (that we sold to the French and Spanish remember) disappear and those fishermen are out of a job on1st January 2021.

We have, at the very least, a moral obligation to allow for a transition period of several years (can be negotiated) to protect not only the livelihoods of the EU fishermen, but of our own fishermen as well. You can't imagine the EU is going to let us export fish to the EU if we put their fishermen out of work. Bear in mind we export most of the seafood we land to the EU and we import most of the seafood we eat from the EU.

What Bojo wants is to negotiate each and every year on quotas allowable to EU and start at zero on day one. This is a simply stupid cake and eat it approach.

As for the 100 years war, was this not about a bunch of English "Nobles" wanting to hold onto some land they had stolen from the French in the first place? Ironic, since England was conquered by the French a short time (in history terms) beforehand. Another example of the rich starting war and the common man doing the fighting.

[Sanqhar]

I see they are rioting and burning cars in Paris again over more "police state" legislation--and Macaroon has vowed to VITO anything that doesn't give the French unlimited fishing rights for 10 years--and we are going to cosy up to him after all this time!!!---I think his attitude is clear--back to the 100 years war!

As for the 100 years war, was this not about a bunch of English "Nobles" wanting to hold onto some land they had stolen from the French in the first place? Ironic, since England was conquered by the French a short time (in history terms) beforehand. Another example of the rich starting war and the common man doing the fighting.

The ruling classes at that time were Norman French, not English. Richard Coeur de Lion (The Lion Heart in translation) didn't speak English. But then he spent very little time in England. His brother John Sans Terre (Lackland in English) at least spent some years here.

It opens the question as to when did the Norman French actually become "English".

The war started because Edward III had a legitimate claim (in "English" eyes) to the French throne via his mother who was the sister of the French king who died without issue. The French did not like the succession passing via a female line (check out "Salic Law").

At least it was the Welsh archers (using French yew longbows) who slaughtered most of the French nobility at Agincourt.

Complicated init?

tom

[Elmer J Fudd]

The ruling classes at that time were Norman French, not English. Richard Coeur de Lion (The Lion Heart in translation) didn't speak English. But then he spent very little time in England. His brother John Sans Terre (Lackland in English) at least spent some years here.

It opens the question as to when did the Norman French actually become "English".

The war started because Edward III had a legitimate claim (in "English" eyes) to the French throne via his mother who was the sister of the French king who died without issue. The French did not like the succession passing via a female line (check out "Salic Law").

At least it was the Welsh archers (using French yew longbows) who slaughtered most of the French nobility at Agincourt.

Complicated init?

tom

Not really complicated in terms of "Use historical Rhetoric at your peril" as somewhere there will be a contradiction (not meant to be a Catcitrus bash, just an amused observation). Funny how it repeats with the German King who couldn't speak English either....

Up over England's Northern border we are having a historical education debate as most children think that Macbeth was only a Shakespeare character and not a real king.... but how would they know, they aren't taught that type of history?

[daveuprite]

Quick reminder, here, for those with conveniently short memories, of how we got into this current mess...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... nd-up-here