BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Looks like it will still happen, which is good news: there will always be a some bumps in the road of any trade talks.rick_chasey said:"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Is that a telegraph euphemism for “massive U.K. concession”?
Real question is how it squares up to the existing EU deal.0 -
The same, but with some minor improvements for both sides.rick_chasey said:Is that a telegraph euphemism for “massive U.K. concession”?
Real question is how it squares up to the existing EU deal.0 -
Some would say the real question is to what extent it improves trade with Japan. We wouldn't necessarily expect it to be a carbon copy of the EU-Japan deal as the a UK has a different fact pattern from the EU.rick_chasey said:Is that a telegraph euphemism for “massive U.K. concession”?
Real question is how it squares up to the existing EU deal.
Looks like we will need to wait and see."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Most seem to assume it will be a carbon copy with a few tweaks.Stevo_666 said:
Some would say the real question is to what extent it improves trade with Japan. We wouldn't necessarily expect it to be a carbon copy of the EU-Japan deal as the a UK has a different fact pattern from the EU.rick_chasey said:Is that a telegraph euphemism for “massive U.K. concession”?
Real question is how it squares up to the existing EU deal.
Looks like we will need to wait and see.
0 -
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
0 -
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
0 -
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
only skim read but love the chart that shows the less likely you are to contribute the more likely you are to think helping out others is a good idearick_chasey said:
I hope they did not pay too much to be told that1 -
I think the point of the article was that the Uk leaving creates the need and the opportunityStevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do.0 -
As in the need for more US military protection for Europe after our departure, given the rather meagre EU defence spending (France excepted)?surrey_commuter said:
I think the point of the article was that the Uk leaving creates the need and the opportunityStevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The Times today is reporting a surprising benefit of Brexit.
The planning for an Australian style Brexit meant that we were better prepared for a global pandemic as we had planned for PPE and food shortages.0 -
If you want to know the point of the article, read it.Stevo_666 said:
As in the need for more US military protection for Europe after our departure, given the rather meagre EU defence spending (France excepted)?surrey_commuter said:
I think the point of the article was that the Uk leaving creates the need and the opportunityStevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do.
If you don’t, don’t. That’s also fine.0 -
Are you ok Rick? It's only only a bicycle forum..rick_chasey said:
If you want to know the point of the article, read it.Stevo_666 said:
As in the need for more US military protection for Europe after our departure, given the rather meagre EU defence spending (France excepted)?surrey_commuter said:
I think the point of the article was that the Uk leaving creates the need and the opportunityStevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do.
If you don’t, don’t. That’s also fine.0 -
I think we already know the answer...darkhairedlord said:
Are you ok Rick? It's only only a bicycle forum..rick_chasey said:
If you want to know the point of the article, read it.Stevo_666 said:
As in the need for more US military protection for Europe after our departure, given the rather meagre EU defence spending (France excepted)?surrey_commuter said:
I think the point of the article was that the Uk leaving creates the need and the opportunityStevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do.
If you don’t, don’t. That’s also fine.
I was only asking a question, but as usual he can't be bothered to answer; his only reply seems to 'go read the article'. Don't think I will now."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The point is that you are interpreting an article that you have not read.Stevo_666 said:
I think we already know the answer...darkhairedlord said:
Are you ok Rick? It's only only a bicycle forum..rick_chasey said:
If you want to know the point of the article, read it.Stevo_666 said:
As in the need for more US military protection for Europe after our departure, given the rather meagre EU defence spending (France excepted)?surrey_commuter said:
I think the point of the article was that the Uk leaving creates the need and the opportunityStevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do.
If you don’t, don’t. That’s also fine.
I was only asking a question, but as usual he can't be bothered to answer; his only reply seems to 'go read the article'. Don't think I will now.0 -
But Stevo, there is no appetite for a federal Europe. I know, because people on here have said so.Stevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do.
0 -
I just asked a question, it wasn't necessarily related to the article. It's also part of training Rick not to be so bloody lazy.surrey_commuter said:
The point is that you are interpreting an article that you have not read.Stevo_666 said:
I think we already know the answer...darkhairedlord said:
Are you ok Rick? It's only only a bicycle forum..rick_chasey said:
If you want to know the point of the article, read it.Stevo_666 said:
As in the need for more US military protection for Europe after our departure, given the rather meagre EU defence spending (France excepted)?surrey_commuter said:
I think the point of the article was that the Uk leaving creates the need and the opportunityStevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do.
If you don’t, don’t. That’s also fine.
I was only asking a question, but as usual he can't be bothered to answer; his only reply seems to 'go read the article'. Don't think I will now."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Apparently so Bally. They must also know that people like Macron are lying every time they talk about ever more integration.ballysmate said:
But Stevo, there is no appetite for a federal Europe. I know, because people on here have said so.Stevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'm sure I read people on here saying the opposite.ballysmate said:
But Stevo, there is no appetite for a federal Europe. I know, because people on here have said so.Stevo_666 said:
The EU isn't needed for military co-operation and we have NATO for that. Also the EU may want to up its defence spending after our departure, given that UK and France were/are the biggest defence spenders in the EU.spatt77 said:
Well yes, you're right, without us the EU can be more of a federalist structure, I have my doubts if it will strengthen the EU in a militarily or Intelligence point of view though, both us and France are the military powers in Europe and intelligence wise we contribute around 64% of all intelligence throughout the EU. There is no reason we cant cooperate on this but you never know eh!rick_chasey said:
So here’s the FT’s chief foreign affairs writer in his column - will leave it up to you to decide if it contravenes my rule about opinion columnists or not.
Anyway he makes the decent point that without the U.K. the EU doesn’t have an obvious block for a more federalist EU (as the U.K. veto no longer exists) and that in some ways that strengthens the EU as a more unified EU can flex a bit more (on the idea that if they can agree collective borrowing they can agree to collective military spending if required re Russia/China etc).
The EU can be more federalist in many areas now, but many in the UK will see our departure being quite timely if that is what the EU wants to do.0 -
KG
You seem to have missed the heavy sarcasm that laced my post.0 -
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
Have you only just realised what the EU wants?tailwindhome said:Extraordinary stuff
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I think he’s making the point IDS is complaining about the very same thing he voted for in parliament.Stevo_666 said:
Have you only just realised what the EU wants?tailwindhome said:Extraordinary stuff
0 -
Probably voted to curtail the time spent debating it.rick_chasey said:
I think he’s making the point IDS is complaining about the very same thing he voted for in parliament.Stevo_666 said:
Have you only just realised what the EU wants?tailwindhome said:Extraordinary stuff
0 -
Are there any other professions where you'd use a public forum like twitter to shout from the treetops about how badly you'd done your job?0
-
Who could possibly know that IDS was so stupid.
He read it, voted for it, cut the debate to three days on it, and our beloved leader Boris signed it. You won, deal with it!0 -
Maybe he`s angling to get the WA ripped up?0
-
