The benefits of Brexit - the future of the United Kingdom

Are you talking about just this Tory government or all UK governments? , Starmer was waffling on about some wording in the deal yesterday and how it meant that British laws would be inferior to European law, he mentioned the number of days Holidays which you are entitled under EU law and then a MP got up and told him under UK law were already entitled to more days holiday than under EU law

https://twitter.com/BrexitCentral/status/1185522820870217728/video/1


The Labour party keep on going on about workers right and this deal, surely if and when ( and probably not for another generation) when they get in power they can set their own workers rights laws, you don't need EU law.

 

Hmmm... Gotta give props to Johnson for his handling of an impossible situation.

Yes, he technically asked for a delay in a letter. But it's just a standard template even without a signature. It is followed by a paper saying 'look... I was basically pushed in this situation, okay?', and then with another letter saying why he thinks a delay is a bad idea.

Sure, it's yet another delay by parliament. But I gotta give credit where due : he abides by the law without going down (in my opinion, of course).

 

but other

I think there is a court case and the judge is going to give their verdict concerning the unsigned letter later this week

 

Yes, truly pathetic. Corbyn needs big daddy Brussels to decide the laws in his country.
Anyway, I enjoy the this satire. May it never end (no pun intended).

 

You should not forget of the past. The present means little in politics.

Quote:
"Research by Dr Hagemann and Professor Hix shows that between 2009 and 2015 the UK voted against the majority 12.3% of the time, compared to 2.6% of the time between 2004 and 2009.
...
In terms of the total volume of laws passed, the proportion of times the UK government has been on the “losing side” is small at about 2% since 1999. In recent years the UK has been losing a lot more votes, and now loses a higher proportion of votes than other members."
https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/

The government doesn't oppose much to EU laws. Your thoughts on the MPs making laws by themselves doesn't add up.
What I think about this is that, the more people participate in making laws the better. Having EU members from different background putting their perspective it is a good thing. Certainly better than having only a few from 1 or 2 parties majority.

Wait until there is no food regulation. Do you like to eat food with no labels or genetic modified? I don't! Who knows what they will change as they are no longer forced to brainstorm laws with other EU country members.

People seem to forget history. What happened to entire empires in the past because they were not satisfied enough, and went to conquer the world only to collapse eventually. Cooperation wins all the time.

 

A) What is wrong with genetically modified food, not to mention it is already present.
B) Is that a likely scenario upon leaving?

 

How?

Dont just proclaim, explain positions. (No I'm not watching those videos. )

This sounds very, very odd to me. (EU never owned even their own military much less that of britain. EU still doesnt have a unified foreign policy for gods sake.)

— Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

What is wrong with lower social and living standards is the question you want to ask. For about the next 10 years.


Whats wrong with GMOs, basically is that you drive populations into 'mobile game ecosystems'.

You patent not only the modification but the entire organism (plant), then you design in, that the plant cant naturally reproduce. Then you sell the seed. (With 'It produces higher yields' marketing.). One harvest gone wrong and your farmers are bancrupt, asking the state for help - which then buys new seeds, from you.

You own the plant. You design away natural reproduction of crops. (You have to, or risk of mutations which are problematic as well.) Then you tell people, that this is the future. Thats the biggest issue with GMOs to date. (Not just with my activist hat on, but also generally speaking. It really is.)

 

@notimp
If you cant be bothered to watch the Videos I cant be bothered to explain
It is not a Proclamation it is a spoiler for the EDF-EDU-EDA-PESCO.
Lisbon Treaty.

 

The issue is, that your videos seem to be propaganda, by mentaly deranged people. At first glance. So...

I ask for an explaination.

The EU doesnt even decide on military actions within their own countries. Remember the US caused second Iraq war ('axis of evil')?

France said partly yes, germany said no entirely? Those decisions were always national.

There is no EU ministry for military decisions, no EU body for military decisions... Those bodies always remained outside the EU.


You currently have NATO as a deciding body, and you have whats called 'security cooperation' talks. Those are and always have been national (intergovernmental).

 

@notimp
Propaganda is a fabricated lie these are Facts.

Mentally Ill People... Dont even bother speaking anymore on the Subject you are clearly ignorant.

 

This is propaganda.

Dear friend.

There have been talks about further integration of military decision making - which is seen as 'maybe necessary', because the US has said to want to leave the middle east mid term. So we have to replace that with 'something'.

But all those discussions are currently starting. Voluntary. And circling around producing the same standards first, and further down the road - maybe - a politically unified 'action force'. But for that we would have to have a EU 'foreign policy' first - which we dont have. (Ms. Federica Mogherini (EU foreign policy delegate) is all but a joke at this moment). But all that is much further down the road and doesnt currently exist, and if the UK would be part of it - it would be entirely voluntarily - I have to imagine.

So what do you know that I don't.

 

TRUTH!
Seek it!
GodBless

 

YOU MUST KNOW that western stile of prosperity is based on greedy pillage from imperialism and colonialism.

 

2min30 into your first video:

"Unfortunately the government seems to have seen the british military as a throw away chip in bargening, and effectively the government has commited us to numerous defense initiatives and indicated, that it will commit us into even deeper entanglement into EU defense mechanisms."

The leading question the reporter was asking was 'Has the british government done enough to use its military power to get concessions ('goodies') from the EU during Brexit negotiations.'


You my dear sir are a dangerous loon. So is that 'journalists position' ('Have you threatened the EU enough with withdrawing military cooperation for economic gains?').

Because your position is, that Britain should move agains Europe militarily, and you are willing to lie to see that idea fulfilled?


Now, lets look at your sources. In the first youtube clip, they use image material from Ruptly (they probably do it for legal reasons, because they are affiliated) - which is a subsidiary of RT - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruptly You are eating up russian propaganda, dear truth seeking sir.

Getting old generals, past their expiry date to comment on RT cameras... is - propaganda. For those people, because they might have a chip on their shoulder from when they left active duty - this is 'tha truth', but for RT it is something to 'produce reality' with.

Why you eating that up, sir?

Facebook victim?

 

Thanks

Spoiler

Let Me In!

 

Here are the initiatives named by the other 'left active duty' professor the Ruptly following journalist names.

European defense fund

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Defence_Fund
So thats a fund currently, not a deciding body. There is a world of difference. Also its part of the EUs CSDP - because even as of now, all the big military powers within the EU, are within the EU. So this is part of those agreements that now have to get looked at to either get cut, or are not at deposition.
Now - a european defense fund that aims at coordinating national investment to improve interoperability between national armed forces - is probably something that Britain has interest in staying in as well. Be cause if they are not - in Europe, a new larger army develops to which they have no insight in - and which could be antagonistic (opposed to) their military interests.

Why should you have to leave that for greater sovereignty? Because that old professor interviewed by an outlet with russian ties (seemingly) has said so?

European procurement plans

src: https://www.ft.com/content/272daf9a-ec49-11e8-89c8-d36339d835c0

The goal here is 'intercompatibility' if joint operations are ever deemed necessary.

Why should the UK have to break away from that for greater sovereignty? Because that old professor interviewed by an outlet with russian ties (seemingly) has said so?

There are not many armies in Europe. So who would you like the UK to cooperate in the future with, then?

Russia?

Would you very much want to fight another war against the germans?

Whats the goal here?

 

Wikipedia is only good for my Gamelists it is nothing but Propaganda.

 

Anybody in this thread, please dont take whatever CORE posts without a bucketload of salt.

Not everyone posting youtube videos in here has any sense of the importance of source integrity, or simply not going with what RT tells you to think.

I mean, nothing against the russians, they werent dumb enough to believe the 'Voice of America' either, when it was broadcasting from west germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_America).

But CORE is, when it comes from the other direction.

 

People can decide for themselves you dont speak for anyone but yourself. (notimp)

If what im saying is to be taken with a Grain of Salt why are you worrying about it , is your heart fluttering.

Such a delicate Flower.

 

The major 'contributer' to drive forward the narrative of this 'documentary' (which later resorts to having people read off policy legislature names off an iPhone, and putting that in as - certainly not PR) is Robert Oulds who is director of the Bruges Group, which is basically a far right think tank.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruges_Group_(United_Kingdom)#cite_note-26

The first google results for his name offer up political pundit spots on turkish (state sponsored ) television, and from a social media outlet called ''Scientists for EU" which - entertainingly enough is an anti EU PR joint, that holds donation drives at: https://scientists4eu.nationbuilder.com/donate

I mean - come on..

That truth, tha truth - those are the people bringing you that truth.

On message since 1988.

Thank you Baron Harris of High Cross. (I'm not making this up. )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Harris,_Baron_Harris_of_High_Cross

Baron of High Cross
Member of the Mont Pelerin Society
Founder of the Social affairs unit
Founder of the 'No Turning Back Group' and the 'Wincott Foundation'
Director of Robert Murdochs Times Newspaper company

Now, thats a life..