Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Well brexit's on, what next? it will probably be a couple years before the pull out is finalized, but what do people think will happen on both sides of the channel ?
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
On the jobs front, my parents run a guesthouse at a ferry port with the UK. They calculate 30% of their business comes from Europeans who have driven a camper van or car or whatever across the UK and then tour Ireland.
If it is a big pain in the arse to travel through the UK in future, a chunk of that business will probably just choose to fly direct to dublin instead, or get a ferry from france to Cork.
So, yeah. I feel pretty salty about this result. Still. Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.
kronk wrote: Don't worry, UK. If that relationship doesn't work out, we'll be here. Waiting...
You know you want to...
Didn't the British foreign affairs even consider pan-anglianism thing? composing solely of Anglophonic countries.... (especially the English as a first language) and not the same entity of the British Commonwealth (which actually a post-1783 British Empire 'reformed' until sometimes in 80s when its last colonies were 'given' an independence (which excluded the United States of America).... some members no longer use English as the first language (Myanmar. possibly rejoined after the most recent election, and Malaysia (Melayu is an official language, written with roman characters) ) ) so its memberships will be
- The United Kingdom
- The United States of America
- Canada
- Belize
- Australia and Newzealand (dunno if they even consider this option while Asianism is a big trend there)
- The Phillipines
A fething dictionary wrote:treason
ˈtriːz(ə)n/
noun
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.
"they were convicted of treason"
That is the definition of treason. You do not get to make up new meanings of words just because you want to sound like you're tough.
The key words here are "betraying one's country" and "overthrow the sovereign or government". Staying in means, losing sovereignty, losing control of borders, the army, taxes, laws the whole show. That there are traitors in parliament hardly makes less treasonous. It might not be quite in the same degree of severity as Guy Fawkes but it is still of that kind. Call it treason-lite, if you prefer.
Da Boss wrote: Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.
This seems to be the feeling here in Portugal as well, as far as I can tell.
Thing is, whilst the majority in that vote chose to leave -- there's still no guarantee it will happen. Which is probably another reason why Cameron chose to quit and leave it to a successor instead of activating article 50 immediately.
1. Parliament isn't legally bound to the result of this referendum, they can choose to ignore it if they so desire.
2. A new petition is going around (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215) and it has already amassed >100k signatures. This means they will discuss it at parliament and we'll probably get a 2nd Referendum because the majority of MPs backed staying in the EU anyway.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 15:37:01
Da Boss wrote: Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.
This seems to be the feeling here in Portugal as well, as far as I can tell.
Thing is, whilst the majority in that vote chose to leave -- there's still no guarantee it will happen. Which is probably another reason why Cameron chose to quit and leave it to a successor instead of activating article 50 immediately.
1. Parliament isn't legally bound to the result of this referendum, they can choose to ignore it if they so desire.
2. A new petition is going around (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215) and it has already amassed >100k signatures. This means they will discuss it at parliament and we'll probably get a 2nd Referendum because the majority of MPs backed staying in the EU anyway.
I understand that. I am merely reporting what's going on on my tiny little rectangle in the Iberian peninsula :p
"Let them that are happy talk of piety; we that would work our adversary must take no account of laws."http://back2basing.blogspot.pt/
Wyrmalla wrote: All these statements about UK independence are the opposite of what people were saying regarding Scottish independence. Fun to a hypocrite no?
Like what?
The UK is independent. The UK has its own government, foreign policy, armed forces, tax raising and spending powers, and while it currently is a party to various international agreements with other world powers or organisations that limit its total freedom of action, these can be abrogated by unilateral decision.
Scotland has none of these powers except for a degree of freedom in raising and spending tax revenues.
SolarCross wrote: It might not be quite in the same degree of severity as Guy Fawkes but it is still of that kind. Call it treason-lite, if you prefer.
Da Boss wrote: Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.
This seems to be the feeling here in Portugal as well, as far as I can tell.
Thing is, whilst the majority in that vote chose to leave -- there's still no guarantee it will happen. Which is probably another reason why Cameron chose to quit and leave it to a successor instead of activating article 50 immediately.
1. Parliament isn't legally bound to the result of this referendum, they can choose to ignore it if they so desire.
2. A new petition is going around (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215) and it has already amassed >100k signatures. This means they will discuss it at parliament and we'll probably get a 2nd Referendum because the majority of MPs backed staying in the EU anyway.
so your Government can ignore the will of the people and a vote and still go the other way? and people call US politics full of it.
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
Regarding the allegation that Farage is "backtracking" on taking the £350m we give to to the EU and using it for the NHS...thats utter bs. The Official Leave Campaign made that pledge. Farage was not part of that campaign, he helped lead a separate campaign. He had no part in making that pledge.
That ITV/Good Morning interview was an ignorant hit piece attacking Farage for something he wasn't responsible for.
HOW quickly the unthinkable became the irreversible. A year ago few people imagined that the legions of Britons who love to whinge about the European Union—silly regulations, bloated budgets and pompous bureaucrats—would actually vote to leave the club of countries that buy nearly half of Britain’s exports. Yet, by the early hours of June 24th, it was clear that voters had ignored the warnings of economists, allies and their own government and, after more than four decades in the EU, were about to step boldly into the unknown.
The tumbling of the pound to 30-year lows offered a taste of what is to come. As confidence plunges, Britain may well dip into recession. A permanently less vibrant economy means fewer jobs, lower tax receipts and, eventually, extra austerity. The result will also shake a fragile world economy. Scots, most of whom voted to Remain, may now be keener to break free of the United Kingdom, as they nearly did in 2014. Across the Channel, Eurosceptics such as the French National Front will see Britain’s flounce-out as encouragement. The EU, an institution that has helped keep the peace in Europe for half a century, has suffered a grievous blow.
Related topics European Union United Kingdom Managing the aftermath, which saw the country split by age, class and geography, will need political dexterity in the short run; in the long run it may require a redrawing of traditional political battle-lines and even subnational boundaries. There will be a long period of harmful uncertainty. Nobody knows when Britain will leave the EU or on what terms. But amid Brexiteers’ jubilation and Remain’s recriminations, two questions stand out: what does the vote mean for Britain and Europe? And what comes next?
Brexit: the small print The vote to Leave amounts to an outpouring of fury against the “establishment”. Everyone from Barack Obama to the heads of NATO and the IMF urged Britons to embrace the EU. Their entreaties were spurned by voters who rejected not just their arguments but the value of “experts” in general. Large chunks of the British electorate that have borne the brunt of public-spending cuts and have failed to share in Britain’s prosperity are now in thrall to an angry populism.
Britons offered many reasons for rejecting the EU, from the democratic deficit in Brussels to the weakness of the euro-zone economies. But the deal-breaking feature of EU membership for Britain seemed to be the free movement of people. As the number of new arrivals has grown, immigration has risen up the list of voters’ concerns.
Accordingly, the Leave side promised supporters both a thriving economy and control over immigration. But Britons cannot have that outcome just by voting for it. If they want access to the EU’s single market and to enjoy the wealth it brings, they will have to accept free movement of people. If Britain rejects free movement, it will have to pay the price of being excluded from the single market. The country must pick between curbing migration and maximising wealth.
David Cameron is not the man to make that choice. Having recklessly called the referendum and led a failed campaign, he has shown catastrophic misjudgment and cannot credibly negotiate Britain’s departure. That should now fall to a new prime minister.
We believe that he or she should opt for a Norwegian-style deal that gives full access to the world’s biggest single market, but maintains the principle of the free movement of people. The reason is that this would maximise prosperity. And the supposed cost—migration—is actually beneficial, as Leave campaigners themselves have said. European migrants are net contributors to public finances, so they more than pay their way for their use of health and education services. Without migrants from the EU, schools, hospitals and industries such as farming and the building trade would be short of labour.
Preventing Frexit The hard task will be telling Britons who voted to Leave that the free having and eating of cake is not an option. The new prime minister will face accusations of selling out—for the simple reason that he or she will indeed have to break a promise, whether over migration or the economy. That is why voters must confirm any deal, preferably in a general election rather than another referendum. This may be easier to win than seems possible today. While a deal is being done, the economy will suffer and immigration will fall of its own accord.
Brexit is also a grave blow for the EU. The high-priesthood in Brussels has lost touch with ordinary citizens—and not just in Britain. A recent survey for Pew Research found that in France, a founder member and long a strong supporter, only 38% of people still hold a favourable view of the EU, six points lower than in Britain. In none of the countries the survey looked at was there much support for transferring powers to Brussels.
Each country feels resentment in its own way. In Italy and Greece, where the economies are weak, they fume over German-imposed austerity. In France the EU is accused of being “ultra-liberal” (even as Britons condemn it for tying them up in red tape). In eastern Europe traditional nationalists blame the EU for imposing cosmopolitan values like gay marriage.
Although the EU needs to deal with popular anger, the remedy lies in boosting growth. Completing the single market in, say, digital services and capital markets would create jobs and prosperity. The euro zone needs stronger underpinnings, starting with a proper banking union. Acting on age-old talk of returning powers, including labour-market regulation, to national governments would show that the EU is not bent on acquiring power no matter what.
This newspaper sees much to lament in this vote—and a danger that Britain will become more closed, more isolated and less dynamic. It would be bad for everyone if Great Britain shrivelled into Little England and be worse still if this led to Little Europe. The leaders of Leave counter with the promise to unleash a vibrant, outward-looking 21st-century economy. We doubt that Brexit will achieve this, but nothing would make us happier than to be proved wrong.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 15:50:19
Given the amount of voters guilt that seems to be floating around due to the impact of what leaving is actually causing, I think a second referendum would go the other way. That said, I really don't think we will get one and even if we did the EU seem pretty intent on seeing us leave now (although a second vote leading to us apologising and coming back with our tail between our legs may also appeal to them enough to be allowed to stay in).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 15:50:04
Da Boss wrote: Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.
This seems to be the feeling here in Portugal as well, as far as I can tell.
Thing is, whilst the majority in that vote chose to leave -- there's still no guarantee it will happen. Which is probably another reason why Cameron chose to quit and leave it to a successor instead of activating article 50 immediately.
1. Parliament isn't legally bound to the result of this referendum, they can choose to ignore it if they so desire.
2. A new petition is going around (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215) and it has already amassed >100k signatures. This means they will discuss it at parliament and we'll probably get a 2nd Referendum because the majority of MPs backed staying in the EU anyway.
so your Government can ignore the will of the people and a vote and still go the other way? and people call US politics full of it.
It can if they don't make it legally binding when they form the referendum. There are all sorts of loop-holes etc.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 15:52:50
Actually no, the original Guy Fawkes (don't mix him up with V for Vendetta), was a Catholic agent of the papacy (the EU of its day). He also fought for the Spanish against the Dutch whilst the England was at war with Spain and allied with the Dutch. So not an anarchist, literally a traitor agent of a foreign power.
Not that being an anarchist and being a traitor are mutually exclusive conditions to be in, lol.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 16:12:32
A fething dictionary wrote:treason
ˈtriːz(ə)n/
noun
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.
"they were convicted of treason"
That is the definition of treason. You do not get to make up new meanings of words just because you want to sound like you're tough.
The key words here are "betraying one's country" and "overthrow the sovereign or government". Staying in means, losing sovereignty, losing control of borders, the army, taxes, laws the whole show. That there are traitors in parliament hardly makes less treasonous. It might not be quite in the same degree of severity as Guy Fawkes but it is still of that kind. Call it treason-lite, if you prefer.
Democratically working to change one's country is not "attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government". You're deluded.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Regarding the allegation that Farage is "backtracking" on taking the £350m we give to to the EU and using it for the NHS...thats utter bs. The Official Leave Campaign made that pledge. Farage was not part of that campaign, he helped lead a separate campaign. He had no part in making that pledge.
That ITV/Good Morning interview was an ignorant hit piece attacking Farage for something he wasn't responsible for.
What a pity that Farage was happy to let the false claim slide for weeks during the campaign. I am sure it was all justified in the support of a greater cause.
Da Boss wrote: Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.
This seems to be the feeling here in Portugal as well, as far as I can tell.
Thing is, whilst the majority in that vote chose to leave -- there's still no guarantee it will happen. Which is probably another reason why Cameron chose to quit and leave it to a successor instead of activating article 50 immediately.
1. Parliament isn't legally bound to the result of this referendum, they can choose to ignore it if they so desire.
2. A new petition is going around (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215) and it has already amassed >100k signatures. This means they will discuss it at parliament and we'll probably get a 2nd Referendum because the majority of MPs backed staying in the EU anyway.
so your Government can ignore the will of the people and a vote and still go the other way? and people call US politics full of it.
It can if they don't make it legally binding when they form the referendum. There are all sorts of loop-holes etc.
Didn't the British foreign affairs even consider pan-anglianism thing? composing solely of Anglophonic countries.... (especially the English as a first language) and not the same entity of the British Commonwealth (which actually a post-1783 British Empire 'reformed' until sometimes in 80s when its last colonies were 'given' an independence (which excluded the United States of America).... some members no longer use English as the first language (Myanmar. possibly rejoined after the most recent election, and Malaysia (Melayu is an official language, written with roman characters) ) ) so its memberships will be
- The United Kingdom
- The United States of America
- Canada
- Belize
- Australia and Newzealand (dunno if they even consider this option while Asianism is a big trend there)
- The Phillipines
And what would we do exactly? The US isn't going to give the UK a super favourable deal compared to the EU. The UK is a tiny market compared to the EU so why would we get better rates? If anything the UK is going to be stuck with the undiluted TTIP whilst the EU has more punch to remove things they don't want and introduce limits that they do (such as protections for nationalised health services, something which I cannot see the french compromising on). Same with everywhere else. The UK is small compared to the EU.
This belief that the UK on its own would be able to negotiate super awesome trade deals and treaties never stood up to any scrutiny when we are sitting next door to one of the biggest markets in the world, but will now potentially be cut off from.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
Da Boss wrote: Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.
This seems to be the feeling here in Portugal as well, as far as I can tell.
Thing is, whilst the majority in that vote chose to leave -- there's still no guarantee it will happen. Which is probably another reason why Cameron chose to quit and leave it to a successor instead of activating article 50 immediately.
1. Parliament isn't legally bound to the result of this referendum, they can choose to ignore it if they so desire.
2. A new petition is going around (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215) and it has already amassed >100k signatures. This means they will discuss it at parliament and we'll probably get a 2nd Referendum because the majority of MPs backed staying in the EU anyway.
so your Government can ignore the will of the people and a vote and still go the other way? and people call US politics full of it.
It can if they don't make it legally binding when they form the referendum. There are all sorts of loop-holes etc.
But should they?
Depends on your perspective.
For me, staying in the EU would be decidedly better so I would say yes xD
.....but I get your point, it was a vote in which there was a majority for leave which and that should be respected.
Tbh the Referendum should never have taken place to begin with.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 16:03:47
i'm curious with Britain leaving will other countries follow suit and leave the Euro ? I mean before now the only country to leave the EU was Greenland, albeit Greece had talked of it, but now that Britain is allegedly doing it, will other countries follow suit? and if so where will that leave the countries that relied on their cash flush neighbors for support?
still it will take Britain years to untangle themselves from the agreements and policies and such, but it does beg one to wonder if other countries will follow suit?
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
observing relationships between the UK and the continental europe over years. The UK did NOT commit / contribute so much to the EU affairs, UK had its members in the EU Parliament. but when it came to military affairs or foreign ones. the Prime Minister of the UK NEVER speaks on behalf of the EU while the Presidency of France and/or The Chancellorship of Germany represents THE RESTS OF THE E.U. ... the European schism did NOT exists without its roots. the most recent rifts were the Iraq wars of 2003 while Blair (then PM of the UK) sided with the apeface Bush (then the U.S. President) and also joined by yet another anglophonic down under.. the Australia... against the consents of the populace of both nations. France and Germany elected against the war. (and even proposed a unified E.U. armed forces... distanced themself from the U.S. of America) in addition. the UK never uses Euro currency (while the continental members do) so no wonder why E.U. is not the place of the Britania. personally the UK should join the same customs union as the USA or even create an anglophonic versions of it, adding Canada, USA, Australia and Newzealand with it.)
Da Boss wrote: Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.
This seems to be the feeling here in Portugal as well, as far as I can tell.
Thing is, whilst the majority in that vote chose to leave -- there's still no guarantee it will happen. Which is probably another reason why Cameron chose to quit and leave it to a successor instead of activating article 50 immediately.
1. Parliament isn't legally bound to the result of this referendum, they can choose to ignore it if they so desire.
2. A new petition is going around (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215) and it has already amassed >100k signatures. This means they will discuss it at parliament and we'll probably get a 2nd Referendum because the majority of MPs backed staying in the EU anyway.
so your Government can ignore the will of the people and a vote and still go the other way? and people call US politics full of it.
It can if they don't make it legally binding when they form the referendum. There are all sorts of loop-holes etc.
But should they?
If they are thinking of the good of the country's future they ought to, given the amount of aggro and disruption that will happen now, but I don't think it will fly.
The only way it could work is if there is a general election to elect a government to drive through the Article 50 process, and that fails to produce one.
Then the situation would be that the electorate would have voted again and changed their mind about Brexit. Like that bloke who went on TV to express his shock and dismay that his voting Leave had resulted in a vote for Leave. He's someone who might vote different if there was another chance.
Everyone would be happy except for Boris, Farage, the hard core Brexiteers. Also the Exiteers in Holland and so on (people like Le Pen who are quasi-fascists so not tears to be shed there IMO). I think the rest of the Euro governments would be teetering between anger and frustration over yet more British intransigence, and relief at the prospect of the prodigal son returning to the fold.
SolarCross wrote: It might not be quite in the same degree of severity as Guy Fawkes but it is still of that kind. Call it treason-lite, if you prefer.
Guy Fawkes was an Anarchists I believe.
That's David Lloyd's fault, his silly book turned what amounted to a random ultra catholic terrorist into an anarchism symbol. Which I'm sure all anarchists are really grateful for.
Guy Fawkes was actually a Catholic who wanted to restore a Catholic monarch for Britain, which is about as far from anarchism as normal things get, especially as anarchism hadn't been theorised yet anyway (that's Bakunin in the middle of the 19th Century).
Back on somthing resemblig the topic of this thread, our minister of dealing with dirty foreigners is now advocating for a "Spanish-British co-governorship over Gibraltar for "a while" until it is restored to Spanish hands".
Glorious. With any luck he will get kicked from office somewhere next week (we have general elections on Sunday). Without any luck out glorious army will retake what we gave away to the brits in exchange for the Borbons.
Good luck in your adventure my dear brits. If I didn't prefer the kanzlerin's steel boot over our own ridiculous politicians I too would have asked for freedom. But as our ruling class stands I think I'll stay in the IV Rei- The European Union.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Regarding the allegation that Farage is "backtracking" on taking the £350m we give to to the EU and using it for the NHS...thats utter bs. The Official Leave Campaign made that pledge. Farage was not part of that campaign, he helped lead a separate campaign. He had no part in making that pledge.
That ITV/Good Morning interview was an ignorant hit piece attacking Farage for something he wasn't responsible for.
What a pity that Farage was happy to let the false claim slide for weeks during the campaign. I am sure it was all justified in the support of a greater cause.
Oh, get over yourself.
It was not a "False pledge". Farage did not make the pledge. He has no responsibility for keeping it, or for holding the other Leave Campaign to account before or after the Referendum over the promises they make. He's merely given his opinion that he doesn't agree with it, because he thinks its a promise that can't be kept.
The actual people who made the pledge, the Official Leave Campaign, have not to my knowledge, recanted it.. Ergo its not (yet) a "false pledge" and you're geting your knickers in a twist for no reason. Who knows? Maybe the people who actually made the pledge will be able to keep it.
If you could just get over your hate for Farage for one moment, perhaps you could direct your ire at the people who are actually responsible.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/06/24 16:07:31
Asterios wrote: i'm curious with Britain leaving will other countries follow suit and leave the Euro ? I mean before now the only country to leave the EU was Greenland, albeit Greece had talked of it, but now that Britain is allegedly doing it, will other countries follow suit? and if so where will that leave the countries that relied on their cash flush neighbors for support?
still it will take Britain years to untangle themselves from the agreements and policies and such, but it does beg one to wonder if other countries will follow suit?
AFAIK The Netherlands are considering a plebiscite whether to leave or stay with the EU. but I don't think France and Germany will follow. they represent the entire EU for so long, even the founding membership themselves, why leave?
