EU Membership Referendum (Brexit)

[ShaunWhite]

MPs are elected to use their judgment, not to exercise ours. It's been that way for centuries. Get over it. People have enough to do with their own jobs without being expected to study 1000 page agreements and make educated decisions. Most voters vote based on 'feelings' anyway and as traders we all know that gambling that way is a mugs game.

Would you ask someone who didn't know anything about sport to pick your trades? That's exactly what's going on here, my binman probably doesn't fully understand reciprocal arrangements and trade tariffs. Him wanting WTO is a joke, how are we going to compete without our sweet deals when Mexico can build a car for 40p.

[wearthefoxhat]

I've actually downloaded the 585 page pdf (withdrawal agreement) and the explainer. I doubt my MP will whizz over an email to me anytime soon.

Thought I'd see what the Backstop is all about...this is the explainers' version. Clear as mud....

backstop.PNG

[firlandsfarm]

MPs are elected to use their judgment, not to exercise ours.

If that's the case they should all be sacked for wasting public money. Why go to the expense of having a referendum if you are going to put it in the bin especially when £9million was spent on a leaflet telling us it will be our decision, whatever we decide will be implemented. And what training do they have for those roles? None I suspect, they got it so wrong pre-referendum with all their Project Fear scare stories. Shaun, I don't know about your binman but my cat could have got the pre-referendum predictions more right than them. They demonstrated they don't have a clue. And as for "get over it" is that another requirement of a Leaver but not a Remoaner? Seems to me we have had 2 years 9 months of not getting over it Remoaner talk … pot kettle black!

[superfrank]

Roger Bootle - EU will move to full fiscal union, or disband
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... ld-course/

"So, run it by me again: why do many people feel passionately that we must stay in? Of course there are some reasonable economic arguments for remaining although, in my view, they don’t stand up to close analysis. But, interestingly, they aren’t the ones ardently espoused by most Remainers. Many of them seem to confuse European identity with current European political institutions. Liking European food, wine, culture, skiing and sunshine – not to mention German cars – they seem to subliminally assume that somehow these goodies are bound up with current European political institutions and that we would lose access to them if we left the EU. But of course we would continue to enjoy them, just as other non-EU countries do. I have repeatedly stated that the EU is a zone of comparatively low growth and argued that this is related to the EU’s misguided policy obsessions, deriving from its essential nature. But still the Europhile establishment from Tony Blair downwards seems to presume that the EU is a stonking economic success. Perhaps arid economic statistics don’t cut any ice with them (they never did with Tony Blair)."

[BetScalper]

The EU has bigger problems to worry about.

If Russia starts encroaching on its eastern boarders then they will stand defenceless.

It’s very clear that unlike WW2, the USA will not get involved and Putin knows this.

If it wasn’t for the UK pleading with the Americans for help 70 years ago then most of Europe would have been destroyed and conquered.

France should know this more than most but yet the current leader seems he’ll bent on telling the UK to fuck off with no deal.

He and others should be careful what they wish for as France couldn’t fight its way out of a wet paper bag back in the late 1930s and I doubt they will ever again.

[to75ne]

The EU has bigger problems to worry about.

If Russia starts encroaching on its eastern boarders then they will stand defenceless.

It’s very clear that unlike WW2, the USA will not get involved and Putin knows this.

If it wasn’t for the UK pleading with the Americans for help 70 years ago then most of Europe would have been destroyed and conquered.

France should know this more than most but yet the current leader seems he’ll bent on telling the UK to fuck off with no deal.

He and others should be careful what they wish for as France couldn’t fight its way out of a wet paper bag back in the late 1930s and I doubt they will ever again.

I am quite curious about Russia and what our reaction is/would be to a serious Russian threat.

if I remember correctly (correctly being the operative word), when the soviet union broke up, there were treaties with the various new states with Russia about handing over the nuclear weapons that these newly independent states now found themselves in possession of( which then they legally owned and were not Russian weapons anymore) back over to Russia, as they were the only power that had or could expect to have the means to maintain them and dispose of them etc, and the Russians were not very keen on the west getting hold of them.

Ukraine was one of those states that now found themselves with a nuclear missile force and duly gave them back to the Russians under a treaty because assurances were given by the uk (and the usa ) against threats and the use of force against their terrority by Russia, and their political independence.

we capitulated on that agreement with invasion of crimea, and appear to be impotent in the face of blatant Russian aggression on our own soil.

I don't thinks its just france that will not be able to do much or Poland or whoever, seems we cant and have not done anything about Russia, what could we do? we have shown we cant do anything military at all only diplomatic sanctions and the like.

[BetScalper]

The EU has bigger problems to worry about.

If Russia starts encroaching on its eastern boarders then they will stand defenceless.

It’s very clear that unlike WW2, the USA will not get involved and Putin knows this.

If it wasn’t for the UK pleading with the Americans for help 70 years ago then most of Europe would have been destroyed and conquered.

France should know this more than most but yet the current leader seems he’ll bent on telling the UK to fuck off with no deal.

He and others should be careful what they wish for as France couldn’t fight its way out of a wet paper bag back in the late 1930s and I doubt they will ever again.

I am quite curious about Russia and what our reaction is/would be to a serious Russian threat.

if I remember correctly (correctly being the operative word), when the soviet union broke up, there were treaties with the various new states with Russia about handing over the nuclear weapons that these newly independent states now found themselves in possession of( which then they legally owned and were not Russian weapons anymore) back over to Russia, as they were the only power that had or could expect to have the means to maintain them and dispose of them etc, and the Russians were not very keen on the west getting hold of them.

Ukraine was one of those states that now found themselves with a nuclear missile force and duly gave them back to the Russians under a treaty because assurances were given by the uk (and the usa ) against threats and the use of force against their terrority by Russia, and their political independence.

we capitulated on that agreement with invasion of crimea, and appear to be impotent in the face of blatant Russian aggression on our own soil.

I don't thinks its just france that will not be able to do much or Poland or whoever, seems we cant and have not done anything about Russia, what could we do? we have shown we cant do anything military at all only diplomatic sanctions and the like.

There are still a number of former Russian states which have nuclear weapons that were never handed back. However given there age and lack of expertise it’s unlikely they would now be viable.

As for the UK Not having the stomach or balls to deal with Russia. That’s because our government, our country has become soft and politically correct to the extreme.

I may be wrong but if UK nationals were poisened on these shores back in the 1980’s then the reaction and sanctions, including militarily would have been far different.

I am not going to mention her name as it wouldn’t go down too well on here but I am pretty sure she would have done and handled things very differently.

Russia now knows that the EU is weak politically and without the USA militarily too, it always has been, hence why NATO was formed 65 years ago.

The world is ruled by Russia, USA and China. The EU likes to think it’s a big player but it’s nothing more than a side show.

[to75ne]

The EU has bigger problems to worry about.

If Russia starts encroaching on its eastern boarders then they will stand defenceless.

It’s very clear that unlike WW2, the USA will not get involved and Putin knows this.

If it wasn’t for the UK pleading with the Americans for help 70 years ago then most of Europe would have been destroyed and conquered.

France should know this more than most but yet the current leader seems he’ll bent on telling the UK to fuck off with no deal.

He and others should be careful what they wish for as France couldn’t fight its way out of a wet paper bag back in the late 1930s and I doubt they will ever again.

I am quite curious about Russia and what our reaction is/would be to a serious Russian threat.

if I remember correctly (correctly being the operative word), when the soviet union broke up, there were treaties with the various new states with Russia about handing over the nuclear weapons that these newly independent states now found themselves in possession of( which then they legally owned and were not Russian weapons anymore) back over to Russia, as they were the only power that had or could expect to have the means to maintain them and dispose of them etc, and the Russians were not very keen on the west getting hold of them.

Ukraine was one of those states that now found themselves with a nuclear missile force and duly gave them back to the Russians under a treaty because assurances were given by the uk (and the usa ) against threats and the use of force against their terrority by Russia, and their political independence.

we capitulated on that agreement with invasion of crimea, and appear to be impotent in the face of blatant Russian aggression on our own soil.

I don't thinks its just france that will not be able to do much or Poland or whoever, seems we cant and have not done anything about Russia, what could we do? we have shown we cant do anything military at all only diplomatic sanctions and the like.

There are still a number of former Russian states which have nuclear weapons that were never handed back. However given there age and lack of expertise it’s unlikely they would now be viable.

As for the UK Not having the stomach or balls to deal with Russia. That’s because our government, our country has become soft and politically correct to the extreme.

I may be wrong but if UK nationals were poisened on these shores back in the 1980’s then the reaction and sanctions, including militarily would have been far different.

I am not going to mention her name as it wouldn’t go down too well on here but I am pretty sure she would have done and handled things very differently.

Russia now knows that the EU is weak politically and without the USA militarily too, it always has been, hence why NATO was formed 65 years ago.

The world is ruled by Russia, USA and China. The EU likes to think it’s a big player but it’s nothing more than a side show.

i did not realise there are former soviet states that are still holding nuclear weapons , which is concerning as some of them are very backward and unstable.

i concur with the rest of it sadly.

[BetScalper]

I am quite curious about Russia and what our reaction is/would be to a serious Russian threat.

if I remember correctly (correctly being the operative word), when the soviet union broke up, there were treaties with the various new states with Russia about handing over the nuclear weapons that these newly independent states now found themselves in possession of( which then they legally owned and were not Russian weapons anymore) back over to Russia, as they were the only power that had or could expect to have the means to maintain them and dispose of them etc, and the Russians were not very keen on the west getting hold of them.

Ukraine was one of those states that now found themselves with a nuclear missile force and duly gave them back to the Russians under a treaty because assurances were given by the uk (and the usa ) against threats and the use of force against their terrority by Russia, and their political independence.

we capitulated on that agreement with invasion of crimea, and appear to be impotent in the face of blatant Russian aggression on our own soil.

I don't thinks its just france that will not be able to do much or Poland or whoever, seems we cant and have not done anything about Russia, what could we do? we have shown we cant do anything military at all only diplomatic sanctions and the like.

There are still a number of former Russian states which have nuclear weapons that were never handed back. However given there age and lack of expertise it’s unlikely they would now be viable.

As for the UK Not having the stomach or balls to deal with Russia. That’s because our government, our country has become soft and politically correct to the extreme.

I may be wrong but if UK nationals were poisened on these shores back in the 1980’s then the reaction and sanctions, including militarily would have been far different.

I am not going to mention her name as it wouldn’t go down too well on here but I am pretty sure she would have done and handled things very differently.

Russia now knows that the EU is weak politically and without the USA militarily too, it always has been, hence why NATO was formed 65 years ago.

The world is ruled by Russia, USA and China. The EU likes to think it’s a big player but it’s nothing more than a side show.

i did not realise there are former soviet states that are still holding nuclear weapons , which is concerning as some of them are very backward and unstable.

i concur with the rest of it sadly.

It’s very unlikely they could be fired now. Believe it or not it takes allot of expertise to launch a nuclear missile. They start to degrade after 20 years. More worrying now is that they are becoming very unstable to stockpile safely. More than likely they being held in a disused bunker somewhere and been forgotten about.

After the breakup, Georgia was reportedly to have over 300 nuclear warheads. Around 200 were handed back or destroyed. If true where are the other 100 ?, which would be more than enough to cause mayhem.

[Atho55]

This is interesting re Russian GDP....

Russia GDP.png

[BetScalper]

This is interesting re Russian GDP....

Russia GDP.png

Exactly. You proved my point. How is Russia so powerful in the world compared to the EU as a whole, there not..... But they are in reality.

[Dallas]

All 4 votes rejected again!

Farcical

[Euler]

Right who is making the tea? Let me guess they all want to make it, but none of them can agree on how?

[Dallas]

Who needs Big Brother when we have this sort of entertainment on an evening

[BetScalper]

Its like something out of Step Toe & Son.

Just wish i had that Greyhound, with the glasses.