Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The EU are also well aware that Britain is an important ally, at a time when both thr right and left in US politics are calling for the withdrawl of US Military forces from Europe, indeed Bernie Sanders would cut the US Defence Budget and withdraw US Forces from Europe, and Trump and the Right are also not fans of NATO, with some Republicans wanting US Forces withdrawn and even an end to the NATO Alliance, so the future is far from certain.
Annoying Britain would just lead to Britain, retreatuing from European affairs, builkding a bigger Navy and letting them get on with it and defend themselves from Russia and other foes, indeed I would quite like British forces brought back from places such as Estonia, Poland, Romaniam Norway etc if there is a no deal, and current alliances scrapped due to the EU's stance on the Galileo (satellite navigation) and Macron's stance regarding access to non-EU defebce contractors.
As far as I am concerned, if there's no deal, this has to end and they have to start defending themselves and not relying on other nations, who they treat with disdain, such as the UK and indeed the US.
We have been through this a number of times, so I am not sure why you are not getting this.
The conservative right and also Donald Trump support NATO and are not opposed to NATO. What we are opposed to is having to pay for the defense of Europe, when the nations of Europe are certainly developed enough and wealthy enough to pay for their own defense. We are willing to pay our fair share of NATO costs, but as you know very well, that is not what is happening now, nor has it been happening for many years now.
In fact, we would rather see the lines of defense maintained on European soil as much as possible rather than our own. We are willing to pay quite a bit for this, which we do. But the nations of Europe need to pay their fair share too.
What we are opposed to is picking up the defense tab for Europe, which is a very different thing from being opposed to NATO.
The conservative right and also Donald Trump support NATO and are not opposed to NATO. What we are opposed to is having to pay for the defense of Europe, when the nations of Europe are certainly developed enough and wealthy enough to pay for their own defense.
So cut your defense expenditures on Europe instead of whining. Simple solution. Europe has no control over how much the U.S. CHOOSES to spend so don’t blame them.
Of course, U.S. defense contractors wouldn’t like that and would lobby hard...
I mean the US could hand control of legal decision to the European Courts and scrap the constitution, replace the dollar with the Euro, relinquish border controls and join Schenghen, and could be part of thge great Euroipean Federal dream of a united Europe run by unelected and self appointed bureaucrats in Brussels, with economic decisions dominated by Berlin.
No - then I suggets that Americans offering advice to stay in the EU are hypocrites.
In terms of a trade deal, the current negotiations are in respect of the terms of leaving, the trade deal is something the EU actually wants to do or do you really think they want to restrict trade with their largest market for manufactured goods and put an end to their $100 Billion a year trade surplus with the UK. I really don't think so.
The EU are also well aware that Britain is an important ally, at a time when both thr right and left in US politics are calling for the withdrawl of US Military forces from Europe, indeed Bernie Sanders would cut the US Defence Budget and withdraw US Forces from Europe, and Trump and the Right are also not fans of NATO, with some Republicans wanting US Forces withdrawn and even an end to the NATO Alliance, so the future is far from certain.
Annoying Britain would just lead to Britain, retreatuing from European affairs, builkding a bigger Navy and letting them get on with it and defend themselves from Russia and other foes, indeed I would quite like British forces brought back from places such as Estonia, Poland, Romaniam Norway etc if there is a no deal, and current alliances scrapped due to the EU's stance on the Galileo (satellite navigation) and Macron's stance regarding access to non-EU defebce contractors.
Btw this means that Macron wants Europe to buy its own military hardware, and to stop UK, US and other defence companies competing for orders.
Tgis is at the same time as Britain is supposed to be buying billions of pounds worth of German Boxer armoured vehicles, and Thales a French Defence Company has carried out extensive work on British Aircraft carriers. I suggest we cancel the order and buy from the US, where we will continue to have access to markets.
As for Galileo (satellite navigation) denying us access to a project that we contributed a lot of scientific know how in relation to it's development and contributed £2 Billion towards is pathetic, and doing this whilst British troops patrol the Eastern European Border and British jets patrol the skies from airbases in Romania is just unbelievable.
As far as I am concerned, if there's no deal, this has to end and they have to start defending themselves and not relying on other nations, who they treat with disdain, such as the UK and indeed the US.
It’s nothing to me regardless. The poster below me pretty much sums it up neatly.
You guys joined the EU knowing all along what the rules of the game were. The EU had already given Britain special dispensation like staying out of the monetary union. How many precepts do you expect the EU to just toss out just to keep Britain in the family?
When I think about it, it ALWAYS seems as if Anglophone nations always want extra special dispensation no matter what issue is. The United States is no better. We never want to play by any rules either. I’m beginning to think that we Anglophiles have it in our minds that we’re exceptional. Why, I’ll never know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould
Brave New World, you may not be aware of this, but the United States is a federal union.
It's true.
No borders or tariffs between states. We have unelected bureaucrats running things. States with better economies subside those with poorer economies. Citizens of the various states have to put up with decisions they don't agree with.
For example:
Alabama, a state about the size of England (England 50,500 square miles. Alabama 50,700 square miles) just passed abortion laws that are in opposition to the federal Supreme Court ruling.
Waiting to see if the the Roe v. Wade decision will be struck and abortions will once again be illegal in all states.
Would states be better off without a federal union?
Very well said. Impressive on your part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by English Dave
I have a high regard for you, and your views, which are always interesting to read. On this matter, your knowledge is scant. The complexities of Brexit are hard to grasp by outsiders.
I have seen the EU grow from just a grouping of countries, trading without tariffs, to a mega state controlling many parts of our lives. The long term aim, is ever closer integration, with a United States of Europe the end goal.
We do not want to be a part of that, and the arrogance coming our way from the EU has been an eyeopener, especially since the 2016 vote.
We were told this vote was binding, and we must consider carefully how we voted. It was set up for remain to win, and the powers that be were confident on the result. They were wrong. Immediately after the result of the vote, we were told the will of the majority who voted would be carried out. Within a short time, politicians tried to undermine the result, and keep us in the EU.
We now have a man in Nigel Farage, who within six weeks of forming his Brexit party, has won 29 seats in the European Parliament, with the ruling Tory party winning only four. It is hard to grasp the effect of this on British politics. The Tory party are in meltdown, and panic. All from one man, and how he has returned, and grabbed politics in this country by the throat.
Remaining in the EU means mass immigration to these small islands without end. There has even been mention of drinking water shortages coming down the line, from an ever increasing population. The pressures on housing, schools, the NHS, even roads is massive, and getting worse. We expressed our concerns to the EU about free movement, and we were dismissed. We have to leave, they have given us no choice.
All issues that could’ve been addressed beforehand. Britain joined anyway, but seemingly wants only the benefits and none of the possible drawbacks.
All issues that could’ve been addressed beforehand. Britain joined anyway, but seemingly wants only the benefits and none of the possible downsides.
What we joined in the early 70s, was nothing like what the EU is now. It's name at that time said it all. 'The Common Market,' There was very little political to it at all. The free movement was tiny, and of no concern to British citizens.
Then, the Common Market morphed into the EU, sucking up more and more power, and dominance over member countries.
It really hit the fan when it expanded to include eastern European countries. Once they had free movement within the EU, they moved in huge numbers. Just one country, Poland, had over 900,000 citizens move to live in my country.
The strains on our society have been massive, and ongoing. It will never end as long as we remain in the EU. There is not enough housing, and the benefits of membership of the EU are not enough for the damage being caused. The EU are not interested in our problems. All we hear is free movement is sacrosanct. We have no choice but to leave.
We are also separate states with separate cultures. We share a common language, but just barely.
As for having to put up with riffraff from other places, for several years, my job involved regular work with homeless people in California, Alaska, and Minnesota. The number of southern accents was pretty astounding.
If California were a separate country, it would have the fifth largest economy in the world, $2.747 trillion, just ahead of the UK at $2.625 trillion. "The difference is striking given California's population of 40 million to the UK's 66 million."
So as to the "How would you feel?" question. We know exactly how it feels to have to have to put up with laws we don't want, people we don't care for, and subsidizing less industrious states.
Comparing California to the UK is like comparing apples to oranges!! California is part of a country the size of a continent! Without the US behind it it would NOT be 'the fifth largest economy'! In fact you cant count it at all unless it leaves the US and becomes independent!
What we joined in the early 70s, was nothing like what the EU is now. It's name at that time said it all. 'The Common Market,' There was very little political to it at all. The free movement was tiny, and of no concern to British citizens.
Then, the Common Market morphed into the EU, sucking up more and more power, and dominance over member countries.
It really hit the fan when it expanded to include eastern European countries. Once they had free movement within the EU, they moved in huge numbers. Just one country, Poland, had over 900,000 citizens move to live in my country.
The strains on our society have been massive, and ongoing. It will never end as long as we remain in the EU. There is not enough housing, and the benefits of membership of the EU are not enough for the damage being caused. The EU are not interested in our problems. All we hear is free movement is sacrosanct. We have no choice but to leave.
The expansion of the EU to Eastern countries was a policy pushed by the UK government while France, Germany etc were much more sceptical and wanted to take it more slowly. The UK thought that extending the EU would make it more difficult to deepen integration among the member states because there would be much bigger disparities of development and prosperity. The other EU countries pretty much all took advantage of the 7 year transition period before allowing freedom of movement from the new Eastern EU members, only Ireland and Sweden joined the UK in allowing freedom of movement from day one.
What we joined in the early 70s, was nothing like what the EU is now. It's name at that time said it all. 'The Common Market,' There was very little political to it at all. The free movement was tiny, and of no concern to British citizens.
Then, the Common Market morphed into the EU, sucking up more and more power, and dominance over member countries.
It really hit the fan when it expanded to include eastern European countries. Once they had free movement within the EU, they moved in huge numbers. Just one country, Poland, had over 900,000 citizens move to live in my country.
The strains on our society have been massive, and ongoing. It will never end as long as we remain in the EU. There is not enough housing, and the benefits of membership of the EU are not enough for the damage being caused. The EU are not interested in our problems. All we hear is free movement is sacrosanct. We have no choice but to leave.
We have been through this a number of times, so I am not sure why you are not getting this.
The conservative right and also Donald Trump support NATO and are not opposed to NATO. What we are opposed to is having to pay for the defense of Europe, when the nations of Europe are certainly developed enough and wealthy enough to pay for their own defense. We are willing to pay our fair share of NATO costs, but as you know very well, that is not what is happening now, nor has it been happening for many years now.
In fact, we would rather see the lines of defense maintained on European soil as much as possible rather than our own. We are willing to pay quite a bit for this, which we do. But the nations of Europe need to pay their fair share too.
What we are opposed to is picking up the defense tab for Europe, which is a very different thing from being opposed to NATO.
Looking at purely 'defence' then most of Europe doesn't need any US expenditure, which external power is going to invade the UK, or France, or Germany, or Italy, or Spain?
The only realistic possibility is Russia, and they have nowhere near the capability to invade those countries. It's more of an issue for the Baltic States that's true. But let's not pretend that US military expenditure in Europe is anything to do with protecting Germany, UK, Spain etc from Russian invasion, its about the US wanting a global power-projection capability in as many parts of the world as it can. If the US wants that then fine, but the US should pay for it, it isn't about European defence but rather US 'offense', even if the US withdrew completely from Europe then Russia would not be any threat to the Western European countries (and even most of the Eastern EU countries) so those countries wouldn't need to increase their defence spending if looking purely at their own defence against external threats.
October 31, 2019 is the UK's scheduled leave date.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
