Is there a single country in the EU that hasn't been under the rule of fascist or communist dictatorships, or collaborated with the Nazis?
Sweden and Ireland.
Perhaps Cyprus and Malta, unless British Colonialism counts as dictatorship
'Sweden maintained a position of neutrality during the Second World War; as such, it acted as a major supplier of raw materials for Hitler's military, laundered the gold confiscated from Holocaust victims, and often failed to provide adequate asylum for refugees including the near-completely exterminated Norwegian Jews. Some Swedes even volunteered with the Waffen SS.'
I'd have thought Leavers would be a little reflective about the fact that, far from persuading the public to rally behind their banner, support seems to be flaking away.
It seems not.
Give it time. They've got used to being able to claim the referendum result as the trump card.
It's not a trump card. It is the reason why we're leaving.
Is there a single country in the EU that hasn't been under the rule of fascist or communist dictatorships, or collaborated with the Nazis?
Sweden and Ireland.
Perhaps Cyprus and Malta, unless British Colonialism counts as dictatorship
'Sweden maintained a position of neutrality during the Second World War; as such, it acted as a major supplier of raw materials for Hitler's military, laundered the gold confiscated from Holocaust victims, and often failed to provide adequate asylum for refugees including the near-completely exterminated Norwegian Jews. Some Swedes even volunteered with the Waffen SS.'
Is there a single country in the EU that hasn't been under the rule of fascist or communist dictatorships, or collaborated with the Nazis?
Sweden and Ireland.
Perhaps Cyprus and Malta, unless British Colonialism counts as dictatorship
'Sweden maintained a position of neutrality during the Second World War; as such, it acted as a major supplier of raw materials for Hitler's military, laundered the gold confiscated from Holocaust victims, and often failed to provide adequate asylum for refugees including the near-completely exterminated Norwegian Jews. Some Swedes even volunteered with the Waffen SS.'
St Paul's is first division rather than premier league like those 4, hence Osborne was dangled out of a window by his legs at the Bullingdon Club while at Oxford for being an oik.
No, it's at least the equal of Westminster.
Not in poshness it isn't. It attracts the offspring of top professionals, not royalty and the aristocracy like Eton, Harrow or Westminster
It'll all be academic [boom-boom] anyway once Jezza becomes PM and converts them all to state comprehensives.
Is there a single country in the EU that hasn't been under the rule of fascist or communist dictatorships, or collaborated with the Nazis?
Sweden and Ireland.
Perhaps Cyprus and Malta, unless British Colonialism counts as dictatorship
'Sweden maintained a position of neutrality during the Second World War; as such, it acted as a major supplier of raw materials for Hitler's military, laundered the gold confiscated from Holocaust victims, and often failed to provide adequate asylum for refugees including the near-completely exterminated Norwegian Jews. Some Swedes even volunteered with the Waffen SS.'
I remember a time on pb when waffen ss was mentioned more often on a thread than brexit!!!!
Is this the Ken Livingstone thread?
Nah way before that....it was when the eu elections were dominated by the fact Tory were part of the same eu group as an east European party that had historical connections to waffen ss.
Is there a single country in the EU that hasn't been under the rule of fascist or communist dictatorships, or collaborated with the Nazis?
Sweden and Ireland.
Perhaps Cyprus and Malta, unless British Colonialism counts as dictatorship
I believe Finland became independent before the October revolution too, and remained a democracy throughout WW2.
Of course one of the successes of the EU is the establishment of deep democratic roots across the continent.
Wrong there. Finland celebrated 100 years of independence last week. After the October revolution. It was a democracy and the first in Europe to give full voting rights to women. But its geopolitical position required it to fight on both sides in WWII.
St Paul's is first division rather than premier league like those 4, hence Osborne was dangled out of a window by his legs at the Bullingdon Club while at Oxford for being an oik.
No, it's at least the equal of Westminster.
Not in poshness it isn't. It attracts the offspring of top professionals, not royalty and the aristocracy like Eton, Harrow or Westminster
It'll all be academic [boom-boom] anyway once Jezza becomes PM and converts them all to state comprehensives.
Given half the Corbynistas were privately or grammar school educated (including Corbyn himself) unlikely, it was not in the last Labour manifesto and would be unlikely to get through Parliament. Plus of course most of the top private schools now have overseas branches in the Far East and Middle East anyway and the parents who would choose the top public schools are rich enough to send them to board there, they are not going to send them to the local comp, especially a bog standard one
Do you imagine that a Europe-wide democracy is feasible, in which the decision-makers are chosen by voters from the 28 counties and can be removed in elections? No, of course not. And look at what we have: unelected bureaucratic decision makers and a sham of a Parliament which is just a talking shop flitting between Brussels and Strasbourg.
I think it is a plausible argument that the EU's problem is that it simultaneously is not integrated tightly enough, while also integrated far too much - your complaint about the "sham talking shop" could be resolved either way.
Is there a fairy-tale like Goldilocks, but where the moral of the story is the reverse? Being in the middle isn't always "just right", though as a creature of compromise it is where the EU is always likely to lie. ("Falls between two stools" is the closest I can think of, but is an expression rather than a story.)
Do you imagine that a Europe-wide democracy is feasible, in which the decision-makers are chosen by voters from the 28 counties and can be removed in elections? No, of course not. And look at what we have: unelected bureaucratic decision makers and a sham of a Parliament which is just a talking shop flitting between Brussels and Strasbourg.
I think it is a plausible argument that the EU's problem is that it simultaneously is not integrated tightly enough, while also integrated far too much - your complaint about the "sham talking shop" could be resolved either way.
Is there a fairy-tale like Goldilocks, but where the moral of the story is the reverse? Being in the middle isn't always "just right", though as a creature of compromise it is where the EU is always likely to lie. ("Falls between two stools" is the closest I can think of, but is an expression rather than a story.)
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
This is the most important piece that I have read recently on Brexit, from Jonathan Portes
I would quibble with his gloss on the ability to do trade deals - we would have to negotiate these under any Brexit scenario. It's entirely up to the other party whether they accept British proposals. Some would; some probably wouldn't. But he is spot on with his core point that we need to make choices. That we stupidly put ourselves into this situation doesn't remove the need to make those choices:
What parliament really wants – and quite right too – is a say about the much more fundamental question that will be discussed in phase 3 of the negotiations – what will the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with the EU look like? Will we seek to maintain, as far as possible, the current degree of economic integration with the EU, even after we leave its political structures? That is, do we seek to remain, formally or through some alternative arrangements, in the EU single market and/or customs union? Or do we seek to disengage and negotiate a “deep and comprehensive trade arrangement” with the EU – that is, a comprehensive free trade agreement, with nothing like the degree of regulatory convergence implied by the single market. The latter would mean a very significant increase in barriers to trade – formal and informal – with our largest trading partner, but on the other hand offers the opportunity to shape our own regulatory framework and to conclude trade deals with the rest of world.
That is a genuinely meaningful choice. It is not one that was on the referendum ballot, and there are former remainers and leavers on both sides of the divide. It is not one that has ever been properly debated or decided, either in parliament or the country. Much of the debate has been of the “cake and eat it” kind. Indeed, Theresa May has so far refused to even have a proper discussion in cabinet, since she knows there is deep disagreement.
On this, the most fundamental issue, the EU27 aren’t seeking to impose their views. As EU representatives have said repeatedly, we have a binary choice to make, but it is our choice.
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
St Paul's is first division rather than premier league like those 4, hence Osborne was dangled out of a window by his legs at the Bullingdon Club while at Oxford for being an oik.
No, it's at least the equal of Westminster.
Not in poshness it isn't. It attracts the offspring of top professionals, not royalty and the aristocracy like Eton, Harrow or Westminster
It'll all be academic [boom-boom] anyway once Jezza becomes PM and converts them all to state comprehensives.
Given half the Corbynistas were privately or grammar school educated (including Corbyn himself) unlikely, it was not in the last Labour manifesto and would be unlikely to get through Parliament. Plus of course most of the top private schools now have overseas branches in the Far East and Middle East anyway and the parents who would choose the top public schools are rich enough to send them to board there, they are not going to send them to the local comp, especially a bog standard one
Sorry, I couldn't find the tongue-in-cheek emoji!
Interesting that you recognise the importance of what is in the manifesto for any prospective Labour programme though.
You don't know Europe any better than I do. I'm married to a European, and was educated at an international school. So let's leave the "I know it better than you" card at home, shall we?
It neither impresses nor convinces me. Just shows the weakness of your argument.
I'm afraid I think it's guff: the only level of debate taking place is the rate at which ever closer union should take place, not its destination, and at the moment an EU army and Eurozone budget are very much in vogue.
Eurosceptics have been saying this for years. And sneered at for it. The funny thing is that had the EU and the Remain camp demonstrably been able to show that the current levels of integration were "it", and there was no more to come - ever - we probably never would have left. But, they'd prefer to blame the Right-wing of the Tory party, and Dacre.
Morons.
On your final point, everyone knows Corbyn supports Leave, but perhaps others may be more skilled at cognitive dissonance than I am.
Look, this is silly. I've lived for 32 years on the Continent, and been actively involved in three Continental political parties; I routinely follow European affairs in four countries' media, and have done for most of my adult life. I merely said "I know European politics quite well". You seem to have taken that as some sort of personal competition with you?
But regardless of us, the point is that few European politicians outside Benelux pay more than lip service to the "single country" idea which Jean Monnet wanted. The average view in practice is "a bit closer here and there, now and then". Full union is a vague aspiration which everyone nods to but few try seriously to bring about.
We're not convincing each other, though, are we? Never mind - good night!
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
Do you imagine that a Europe-wide democracy is feasible, in which the decision-makers are chosen by voters from the 28 counties and can be removed in elections? No, of course not. And look at what we have: unelected bureaucratic decision makers and a sham of a Parliament which is just a talking shop flitting between Brussels and Strasbourg.
I think it is a plausible argument that the EU's problem is that it simultaneously is not integrated tightly enough, while also integrated far too much - your complaint about the "sham talking shop" could be resolved either way.
Is there a fairy-tale like Goldilocks, but where the moral of the story is the reverse? Being in the middle isn't always "just right", though as a creature of compromise it is where the EU is always likely to lie. ("Falls between two stools" is the closest I can think of, but is an expression rather than a story.)
It's a fair summary. The EU is a glass half-full construct and is not likely to move on from there. Its justification is that a glass half full is better than no glass at all. There isn't a feasible alternative to the EU. It's that or nothing.
Following OU discussions earlier, I've been reading their free What Is Europe? course. So far (60% in) it doesn't sound very pro UK in EU, but that could change before the end!
It starts with this historically interesting analysis of the EU from the early 80s I think
French warplanes and helicopters may be battling jihadists in the deserts of Africa and the Middle East, but the French Air Force on the whole is in a disastrous state, with 56 per cent of all its aircraft unfit to fly at any given moment, according to a senior minister.
St Paul's is first division rather than premier league like those 4, hence Osborne was dangled out of a window by his legs at the Bullingdon Club while at Oxford for being an oik.
No, it's at least the equal of Westminster.
Not in poshness it isn't. It attracts the offspring of top professionals, not royalty and the aristocracy like Eton, Harrow or Westminster
It'll all be academic [boom-boom] anyway once Jezza becomes PM and converts them all to state comprehensives.
Given half the Corbynistas were privately or grammar school educated (including Corbyn himself) unlikely, it was not in the last Labour manifesto and would be unlikely to get through Parliament. Plus of course most of the top private schools now have overseas branches in the Far East and Middle East anyway and the parents who would choose the top public schools are rich enough to send them to board there, they are not going to send them to the local comp, especially a bog standard one
Sorry, I couldn't find the tongue-in-cheek emoji!
Interesting that you recognise the importance of what is in the manifesto for any prospective Labour programme though.
Manifesto commitments remain key for getting controversial things through Parliament
Why should there be a Brexit deal bounce? May surrendered on everything. Even with the MSM whitewash, support from Remainers and the fake unity of the Tories, people are not fooled - they know a crap deal when they see it.
The moment the trade negotiations start and once again it becomes apparent that May will concede on everything once again, Tory support will crater.
Why should there be a Brexit deal bounce? May surrendered on everything. Even with the MSM whitewash, support from Remainers and the fake unity of the Tories, people are not fooled - they know a crap deal when they see it.
The moment the trade negotiations start and once again it becomes apparent that May will concede on everything once again, Tory support will crater.
As long as free movement ends and we progress towards a FTA the Tory vote will remain largely where it is now
Ironically, it now looks more likely that withdrawal from the EU will break up the UK than vice versa. The EU is proving itself fit for purpose in the 21st century, while the UK is looking like a political Norma Desmond.
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
Why should there be a Brexit deal bounce? May surrendered on everything. Even with the MSM whitewash, support from Remainers and the fake unity of the Tories, people are not fooled - they know a crap deal when they see it.
The moment the trade negotiations start and once again it becomes apparent that May will concede on everything once again, Tory support will crater.
This is the most important piece that I have read recently on Brexit, from Jonathan Portes
I would quibble with his gloss on the ability to do trade deals - we would have to negotiate these under any Brexit scenario. It's entirely up to the other party whether they accept British proposals. Some would; some probably wouldn't. But he is spot on with his core point that we need to make choices. That we stupidly put ourselves into this situation doesn't remove the need to make those choices:
What parliament really wants – and quite right too – is a say about the much more fundamental question that will be discussed in phase 3 of the negotiations – what will the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with the EU look like? Will we seek to maintain, as far as possible, the current degree of economic integration with the EU, even after we leave its political structures? That is, do we seek to remain, formally or through some alternative arrangements, in the EU single market and/or customs union? Or do we seek to disengage and negotiate a “deep and comprehensive trade arrangement” with the EU – that is, a comprehensive free trade agreement, with nothing like the degree of regulatory convergence implied by the single market. The latter would mean a very significant increase in barriers to trade – formal and informal – with our largest trading partner, but on the other hand offers the opportunity to shape our own regulatory framework and to conclude trade deals with the rest of world.
That is a genuinely meaningful choice. It is not one that was on the referendum ballot, and there are former remainers and leavers on both sides of the divide. It is not one that has ever been properly debated or decided, either in parliament or the country. Much of the debate has been of the “cake and eat it” kind. Indeed, Theresa May has so far refused to even have a proper discussion in cabinet, since she knows there is deep disagreement.
On this, the most fundamental issue, the EU27 aren’t seeking to impose their views. As EU representatives have said repeatedly, we have a binary choice to make, but it is our choice.
Yes, that's a good analysis, and more interesting than our collective mutual sniping over the referendum. The majority Government view appears to be the latter, with Hammond a likely dissenter.
Niall Ferguson backed Remain but has said he made a mistake, he 'Says EU 'deserved Brexit' because of its failure on the euro, foreign policy, open border migration and failure to combat Islamic extremism.'
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
The idea this is new news is rubbish, It has been very widely known for decades.
There was an excellent book written by Charles Higham in 1983 about collusion with the Nazis called Trading with the Enemy. It covers the idiocy of the Duke of Windsor extensively.
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
It was of course George V1 along with Churchill who helped rally the country to defeat the Nazis. Nazi Germany was of course a republic under Hitler's leadership, as Fuhrer he combined the role of President and Chancellor.
Earlier in Waitrose there was a European lady (not sure where from, and not important, but maybe french..) asking for traditional custard to go with Xmas pudding. The waitrose employee she asked was stood next to tins of custard and showed her them. I interrupted and led her to the brandy butter. Am I reaching out hard enough?
We both know Brexiters are referring to the EU federalists who drive the EU's agenda when they say that. As you put it: "even I'd hesitate about abolishing all 28 countries that soon."
The debate is only about tactics: what's the maximum politically sustainable rate at which "The Dream" should be pursued, to reach the inevitable destination.
The "mad" label put back on eurosceptics in the UK is political chaff designed to disorientate the average UK voter from honing in on the evidence, until it's too late.
If Nick P isn't a typical REMAIN voter then I'm not a typical LEAVE voter.
I voted LEAVE in sorrow more than anger because I like the idea of a European Union where individual countries pool aspects of their sovereignty and work together for the common good of all their citizens. Whether through NATO or other international agencies, Britain already cedes aspects of its sovereignty voluntarily.
The notion of free trade, collaborative working and a single European voice on the world stage isn't unattractive to me but that's not what the EU became. It tried to become a country in its own right and became more interested in those making money than in people in general. The social, economic and cultural catastrophe of the Single Market convinced me the "idea" had lost its way - the EU could have achieved so much more by being so much less but like all institutions once it had power it wanted more.
That doesn't discredit or diminish the dream, only the reality.
I am quite late to the party but this is very good, and whilst my reasons for LEAVE differ I can certainly see where you are coming from.
Paul Dacre getting increasingly desperate to delay his retirement.....
MoS is edited by Grieg. Totally separate paper with different editorial line...
Editor in Chief, but internecine warfare in the Mail as they're all trying to position themselves as potential hi'heid yins on Dacre's departure to his estate in Scotland....
I'm assuming the reason that Australia hasn't declared is because they want to minimise the time used for innings changes. I.e., to make sure there's just the one (England to Australia).
But there is the very real risk England will only need to face two sessions. And if England is able to draw level with Australia, then a draw is near certain.
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
It was of course George V1 along with Churchill who helped rally the country to defeat the Nazis. Nazi Germany was of course a republic under Hitler's leadership, as Fuhrer he combined the role of President and Chancellor.
And he was luke-warm about Kaiser Bill regaining the throne when he occupied Holland in 1940.
I must admit, I think Australia made a mistake not declaring last night. They were 146 ahead, and they will only add about 70 odd in the first session.
I must admit, I think Australia made a mistake not declaring last night. They were 146 ahead, and they will only add about 70 odd in the first session.
Declaring last night might just have given England a chance.
I must admit, I think Australia made a mistake not declaring last night. They were 146 ahead, and they will only add about 70 odd in the first session.
Declaring last night might just have given England a chance.
How?
Let's say they got 200 by tea. They'd be 50 ahead. That's not a chance.
I must admit, I think Australia made a mistake not declaring last night. They were 146 ahead, and they will only add about 70 odd in the first session.
Declaring last night might just have given England a chance.
How?
Let's say they got 200 by tea. They'd be 50 ahead. That's not a chance.
I must admit, I think Australia made a mistake not declaring last night. They were 146 ahead, and they will only add about 70 odd in the first session.
Declaring last night might just have given England a chance.
How?
Let's say they got 200 by tea. They'd be 50 ahead. That's not a chance.
I must admit, I think Australia made a mistake not declaring last night. They were 146 ahead, and they will only add about 70 odd in the first session.
Declaring last night might just have given England a chance.
How?
Let's say they got 200 by tea. They'd be 50 ahead. That's not a chance.
This is Day 4.
Oops. I thought it was day five.
I hope you haven't been betting on the draw on that basis!
I must admit, I think Australia made a mistake not declaring last night. They were 146 ahead, and they will only add about 70 odd in the first session.
Declaring last night might just have given England a chance.
How?
Let's say they got 200 by tea. They'd be 50 ahead. That's not a chance.
This is Day 4.
Oops. I thought it was day five.
I hope you haven't been betting on the draw on that basis!
I must admit, I think Australia made a mistake not declaring last night. They were 146 ahead, and they will only add about 70 odd in the first session.
Declaring last night might just have given England a chance.
How?
Let's say they got 200 by tea. They'd be 50 ahead. That's not a chance.
This is Day 4.
Yes, England are 240 behind, with five sessions remaining in the match. Innings defeat written all over this one.
What parliament really wants – and quite right too – is a say about the much more fundamental question that will be discussed in phase 3 of the negotiations – what will the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with the EU look like? Will we seek to maintain, as far as possible, the current degree of economic integration with the EU, even after we leave its political structures? That is, do we seek to remain, formally or through some alternative arrangements, in the EU single market and/or customs union? Or do we seek to disengage and negotiate a “deep and comprehensive trade arrangement” with the EU – that is, a comprehensive free trade agreement, with nothing like the degree of regulatory convergence implied by the single market. The latter would mean a very significant increase in barriers to trade – formal and informal – with our largest trading partner, but on the other hand offers the opportunity to shape our own regulatory framework and to conclude trade deals with the rest of world.
That is a genuinely meaningful choice. It is not one that was on the referendum ballot, and there are former remainers and leavers on both sides of the divide. It is not one that has ever been properly debated or decided, either in parliament or the country. Much of the debate has been of the “cake and eat it” kind. Indeed, Theresa May has so far refused to even have a proper discussion in cabinet, since she knows there is deep disagreement.
On this, the most fundamental issue, the EU27 aren’t seeking to impose their views. As EU representatives have said repeatedly, we have a binary choice to make, but it is our choice.
The problem is that this choice does not exist. The EU have been quite clear that we cannot have SM style integration without accepting FOM and that cannot happen. The option of SM style membership without FOM has been comprehensively ruled out, but the remainers just can't cope with this reality. Even Hammond has now worked it out it would seem.
Therefore the only two options are a FTA where we get tied into SM regulations anyway, or an FTA where we do not (eg CETA), and the latter may not be available from the EU anyway given their stated objective to reduce the ability of the UK to diverge because they are scared to death that we would gain a competitive advantage.
If the negotiation was being done logically, WTO may well be a better option than anything that will actually be on offer. Unfortunately, the desperate need to placate remainers looks like it will drive us to a terrible outcome - we will have convergence but none of the benefits attributed to the SM and none of the freedoms of a proper break from the EU.
Comments
Irish nationals who fought for the British against the nazis were only recently pardoned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism_in_Sweden#Wartime
Of course one of the successes of the EU is the establishment of deep democratic roots across the continent.
I claim £5
The EU: Bony's legacy. Wrong there. Finland celebrated 100 years of independence last week. After the October revolution. It was a democracy and the first in Europe to give full voting rights to women. But its geopolitical position required it to fight on both sides in WWII.
https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/942170559865020416
I see the Brexiteers are losing their shit having just found out what Tezza said in Florence...
Happy Days
I have seen it twice now. In neither case, was the cinema full
I forgot about the Bank of England financing the Nazis with Czech gold.
We have a history of underplaying our Nazi links, or destroying the evidence therein.
Churchill tried to suppress Nazi plot to restore Edward VIII to British throne
PM sought US and French help to withhold publication of telegrams revealing German overtures to Duke and Duchess of Windsor, cabinet
papers reveal
Winston Churchill wanted “to destroy all traces” of telegrams revealing a Nazi plot to reinstate the former King Edward VIII to the British throne in return for his support during the second world war, newly released cabinet papers have revealed.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/20/winston-churchill-nazi-telegrams-uk-royals-edward-cabinet-papers
Another reason to abolish the monarchy.
I would quibble with his gloss on the ability to do trade deals - we would have to negotiate these under any Brexit scenario. It's entirely up to the other party whether they accept British proposals. Some would; some probably wouldn't. But he is spot on with his core point that we need to make choices. That we stupidly put ourselves into this situation doesn't remove the need to make those choices:
What parliament really wants – and quite right too – is a say about the much more fundamental question that will be discussed in phase 3 of the negotiations – what will the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with the EU look like? Will we seek to maintain, as far as possible, the current degree of economic integration with the EU, even after we leave its political structures? That is, do we seek to remain, formally or through some alternative arrangements, in the EU single market and/or customs union? Or do we seek to disengage and negotiate a “deep and comprehensive trade arrangement” with the EU – that is, a comprehensive free trade agreement, with nothing like the degree of regulatory convergence implied by the single market. The latter would mean a very significant increase in barriers to trade – formal and informal – with our largest trading partner, but on the other hand offers the opportunity to shape our own regulatory framework and to conclude trade deals with the rest of world.
That is a genuinely meaningful choice. It is not one that was on the referendum ballot, and there are former remainers and leavers on both sides of the divide. It is not one that has ever been properly debated or decided, either in parliament or the country. Much of the debate has been of the “cake and eat it” kind. Indeed, Theresa May has so far refused to even have a proper discussion in cabinet, since she knows there is deep disagreement.
On this, the most fundamental issue, the EU27 aren’t seeking to impose their views. As EU representatives have said repeatedly, we have a binary choice to make, but it is our choice.
Tories 41
Labour 42
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5156114/theresa-may-brexit-poll-support-conservative-party/
War breeds strange allies.
Interesting that you recognise the importance of what is in the manifesto for any prospective Labour programme though.
Con (-1) Lab (+2)
Brexit deal bounce my arse.
But regardless of us, the point is that few European politicians outside Benelux pay more than lip service to the "single country" idea which Jean Monnet wanted. The average view in practice is "a bit closer here and there, now and then". Full union is a vague aspiration which everyone nods to but few try seriously to bring about.
We're not convincing each other, though, are we? Never mind - good night!
It starts with this historically interesting analysis of the EU from the early 80s I think
http://www.open.edu/openlearn/ocw/pluginfile.php/614771/mod_resource/content/1/Reading A.pdf
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/16/ground-force-half-frances-military-planes-unfit-fly/
11% prefer Boris as her successor, Ruth Davidson second on 6%.
35% want May to fight the next general election, 23% to go now, 15% want her to stay until after Brexit talks conclude, 11% to stay until the next election.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5156114/theresa-may-brexit-poll-support-conservative-party/
The moment the trade negotiations start and once again it becomes apparent that May will concede on everything once again, Tory support will crater.
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/941805445559152641
But yes, I will try that. Thank you.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4006324/I-wrong-Brexit-Britain-s-influential-historian-Niall-Ferguson-says-mistake-backing-Remain-campaign-says-EU-deserved-result.html#ixzz51TRLFA55
There was an excellent book written by Charles Higham in 1983 about collusion with the Nazis called Trading with the Enemy. It covers the idiocy of the Duke of Windsor extensively.
But there is the very real risk England will only need to face two sessions. And if England is able to draw level with Australia, then a draw is near certain.
Let's say they got 200 by tea. They'd be 50 ahead. That's not a chance.
The problem is that this choice does not exist. The EU have been quite clear that we cannot have SM style integration without accepting FOM and that cannot happen. The option of SM style membership without FOM has been comprehensively ruled out, but the remainers just can't cope with this reality. Even Hammond has now worked it out it would seem.
Therefore the only two options are a FTA where we get tied into SM regulations anyway, or an FTA where we do not (eg CETA), and the latter may not be available from the EU anyway given their stated objective to reduce the ability of the UK to diverge because they are scared to death that we would gain a competitive advantage.
If the negotiation was being done logically, WTO may well be a better option than anything that will actually be on offer. Unfortunately, the desperate need to placate remainers looks like it will drive us to a terrible outcome - we will have convergence but none of the benefits attributed to the SM and none of the freedoms of a proper break from the EU.
No change there then!