We had to suffer all this rubbish yesterday with Cyclefree's implication that "no deal" = Yugoslavia break up.
Cyclefree implied no such thing and was clear about that.
Cyclefree implied that the Yugoslavia break up was what potentiually happened when countries didn't agree on a divorce. It was set out in direct counterpoint to the Velvet Divorce.
Why quote the Yugoslavia break up if it was utterly irrelevant to the argument, except to make an implication by default.
I am glad that seemingly everyone now accepts the inappropriateness of its inclusion.
Can we assume you are comfortable with the USSR comparison given that you haven't commented on it and have obsessively posted about Yugoslavia?
Comments