Brexit.

[j2 lot]

People naturally fear change so the remain / No camps in the respective votes are always going to play on the fear of change and to be honest there's not much more they can do.
The leave / Yes campaigns can/ will promise free unicorns as they have to get over the fear factor and convince us to go for the brave new world as opposed to the comfortable old one.
Interesting point Mike made earlier re the future of the Euro zone. I have heard a few commentators talk about it being a lame duck in the long term and that Brexit would simply bring the timescale forward.

[pete]

Really?

EU stopped war in Europe? so Bosnia and Ukraine have not happened then? (both arguably caused by EU stupidity).

and NATO does not exist?

This is before you get to the bit about southern med countries being returned to the 3rd world with massive unemployment and financial meltdown?

Or the UK getting more and more massive bills from the EU to bail out said countries? (and don't try and claim we have not)

then we get to trade - so no trade can happen outside of the EU? funny that, never seems to cause the US or China any issues - and that's before you consider the EU is a financially shrinking market (and as the UK is the single biggest customer market in the EU, just imagine how small it will be if we left?)

Want another go?

The EU stopped wars by uniting the economies of the major powers in such a way that they could no longer go to war. Yes there have been wars on the outskirts of the EU but not within it.

The EU is by far our largest trading partner, how do you work out that we are the biggest customer market? In what sense?

[pete]

This week we're saying goodbye to an indian national who's worked for me for 4 years. He's been in the UK for 12 years, highly skilled, highly articulate and just a sound bloke. One of the most popular members of the team and just a machine when it comes to hard work.

Only a month ago his application for a visa continuation was denied.

So, after advice from his solicitor he applied to fast track citizenship.

This was denied and he was given 4 weeks to leave the country.

IN the background his wife's family were so appalled that he was giving up his Indian national status that they cleared his bank accounts and took her and the kids back to India.

In the space of a month his life has been completely destroyed.

Why does the fate of an Indian national matter to the Brexit campaign? Think about it......we vote out and what happens to the thousands of EU national that call this place home? Two doors along a greek born architect and his (also greek) interior designer wife have moved in. A nicer couple you couldn't hope to meet. They've lived in Glasgow for 10 years and it's home. They were bubbling over with enthusiasm for the country, the city and the location of their new home. They've been so friendly and kind to us and they have made such a fuss of Donkey Jnr and his obsession with their wee dog.

On what basis do we decide who stays and who goes? Do we draw a line in the sand and say "if you've been here x years and you earn Y you're ok?"

Who fills the gaps that they leave? I can't get decent Scottish developers to replace my Indian national for love nor money........am i to go to the job centre and see if someone from East Calder want's to come and join the team? My team in london has as many non-uk born staff as it does Uk born staff and it's brilliant. Every other week a delicacy of some sort is brought it from a visit "home". I've learnt about some bizarre traditions and celebrations. It's great, it makes life more interesting. Yes there are some arseholes from other EU countries but i can also introduce you to a load of arseholes form here.

I fcuk love this country. I love the fact that you can have a neighbour with a name that sounds like a firework going off. Who cares if there are polish shops in the high street? As long as they are busy i'd much prefer that to it being boarded up.

I guess what i'm saying is be careful what you wish for. I'm not seeing a heap of people lining up to take the place of the EU nationals whoi call this place home and i'm not sure i want the perma tanned ex pats back from "the english part of Marbella"

Nicely put.

[Scuffers]

The EU stopped wars by uniting the economies of the major powers in such a way that they could no longer go to war. Yes there have been wars on the outskirts of the EU but not within it.

The EU is by far our largest trading partner, how do you work out that we are the biggest customer market? In what sense?

OK, in very basic terms, prove it.

the EU has done nothing to stop war, are you trying to re-write history?

What has prevented war since 1945 was initially the nuclear standoff (cold war) and more recently, Democracy following the breakup of the soviet union and fall of the Berlin wall, all backup up by the ever presence of NATO.

Bosnia was exacerbated by the EU unilaterally recognising Bosnia and Herzegovina's, but not willing to actually commit to support this position, this then spiraled out of control with various 'EU' peacekeeping forces failing miserably to have any real direction and authority until NATO stepped in.

The current crisis in Yugoslavia is much the same, EU meddling in a country's democracy, offering the world but failing miserably to back up said promises, and then look all surprised when Russia respond.

As for the UK's position in the EU, we are in monetary terms the biggest customer market within the EU, by far.

[thinfourth]

The EU stopped wars by uniting the economies of the major powers in such a way that they could no longer go to war.

So the only thing stopping us from killing each other is the EU

So why aren't we waging all out war against iceland?


Not only are the outside the Eu but they have invaded the UK with really cheap and nasty frozen meals

[istoo]

IN

my lefty thoughts for the evil scum

Brexit wasnt called to raise the Scottish referendum again but it was raised Cameron as his own party is torn on this (and has been for decades), moreso in recent years with the rise of the further right parties within the UK. UKIP etc making their presence more felt, just where does the line of right wing politics stop? What will be more interesting is to what will happen to the losing half of the conservative party in the UK as a whole. The only comparison with the Scottish referendum is that the SNP had their entire party going one way, the UK's current main party is divided. Much like last year you present 50% of the population wiuth one view and 50% with an opposing view. That breeds the best and worst in people. That is a much bigger issue imho. I believe we will see an emergence of either the conversatives being firmly right of centre and another element being somewhere between UKIP/conservatives. The political landscape is changing, whether its Scotland or Brexit, its changing.

As an observer and reader on the whole landscape for the past month, what has been eye opening for me has been the shift in one word between Scottish Referendum and the Brexit Referendum. Nationailism, it has much darker undertones this time round, events yesterday made that more chilling.

Although a Yes voter in the Scottish referendum, my decision so far is simple, I cant see any economic advantage in leaving. Also, laugh as you may, peace. I do believe the EU (and the other collective bodies) have helped keep Europe from war. And for all the above reasons, that troubles our futures far far greater Scotland Independence.

A more appropriate question is if England go out of UEFA cup in the first round, I believe that will have a bigger influence to Brexit that anything the SNP chooses to say or do.

Really?

EU stopped war in Europe? so Bosnia and Ukraine have not happened then? (both arguably caused by EU stupidity).

and NATO does not exist?

This is before you get to the bit about southern med countries being returned to the 3rd world with massive unemployment and financial meltdown?

Or the UK getting more and more massive bills from the EU to bail out said countries? (and don't try and claim we have not)

then we get to trade - so no trade can happen outside of the EU? funny that, never seems to cause the US or China any issues - and that's before you consider the EU is a financially shrinking market (and as the UK is the single biggest customer market in the EU, just imagine how small it will be if we left?)

Want another go?

Really

Firstly, not having a go, making my opinion. But you certainly seem to be trying to have a misguided go by replying to what you think i wrote. Suggest you go back for a reread. But since you started...

"I do believe the EU (and the other collective bodies) have helped keep Europe from war." Its quite well documented in history events of 1914-1918 and 1939 to 1945, or did they not happen? How do you think that the collapse of Yugoslavia might have played out if there was no EU, not NATO no UN... Nothing to do with the fact it was a created state at the end of WW1 in what was then the muslim/christian world divide. The world changes, get used to it.

Med meltdown, never mentioned or hinted at that but since you asked. UK had one of those too. We are in a Union, a collection of states of varying strengths and weakness but with a common thread. That means like it or not you have to accept the how thats divided up. What about the 750,000 nationals living and working in Spain? What about the amount of British debt in spain, Santander... i bet they are carrying a bit of british debt. We had this discuss last year on the Scottish referendum but a lot of shifted opinions.

Never once mentioned we can't trade with the rest of the world, but you clearly want to discuss it, how you think leaving is better economically? i have seen nothing concrete to make me think otherwise, if you can change my opinion i am all ears.

Lastly, i assume you agree with the reasons for Brexit?

[istoo]

The EU stopped wars by uniting the economies of the major powers in such a way that they could no longer go to war.

So the only thing stopping us from killing each other is the EU

So why aren't we waging all out war against iceland?

Not only are the outside the Eu but they have invaded the UK with really cheap and nasty frozen meals

err WW1 WW2?

last bit is funny though

[robin]

Simon,

Your tone is very aggressive, in my opinion, and I don't understand why you are so hostile. Everyone on here is allowed to express their opinion, you included. If you disagree with somebody else of course you challenge it, but why be so shouty about it - do you think that approach persuades anyone to agree with you? More likely it shuts down the discussion because people don't like the aggression.

For example (my emphasis):

Or the UK getting more and more massive bills from the EU to bail out said countries? (and don't try and claim we have not)

The UK has provided a total of £5bn via the EU for two bailouts: €3bn for Ireland in November 2010 and €3.5bn for Portugal in May 2011.
The UK has not made a contribution via the EU for the other eurozone bailouts: the three Greek ones, in 2010, 2012 and 2015 and for the Spain and Cyprus bailouts in 2012.
So very little in the grand scheme of things.

Why shouldn't we try to claim we have not, when it turns out we have not recently and what we have contributed is not exactly massive compared to our annual expenditure.

EU stopped war in Europe? so Bosnia and Ukraine have not happened then? (both arguably caused by EU stupidity).

It is impossible to argue that EU stupidity caused the Bosnian war. The roots of the Bosnian war are much more complex AND the war was caused by the people that started shooting. You could more convincingly argue that WWII caused the creation of Yugoslavia, casting together the various ethnicities of the anti-fascist resistance and that these would, perhaps inevitably disintegrate violently in the 90s. Hard to blame the EU for that (it didn't exist).

It is an undeniable fact that at its roots the EU (predecessor) was formed in direct response to the wars that had previously raged in Europe killing millions and millions. It is impossible to say whether or not another European war could have come from the ashes of WWII and whether or not the Council of Europe (and successors) prevented such a war from happening. I agree that with hindsight the threat of another European war was dwarfed by the threat of a global nuclear war and there is nothing that Europe could have done to prevent it from happening. Does that mean they should have not bothered with the Council of Europe? - I don't think so.

You could argue that today there is not much risk of a war between Germany, France and the UK and that the new threats to peace come from elsewhere, but who knows what stresses and strains might come in future years and at what point some right wing nationalist leader might decide that occupying a weak neighbour might be good for his domestic image?

The UK's membership of the EU is nothing to do with that, though (we joined much much later), and I would be the first to agree that the EU itself would be as effective in this regard with or without the UK.

Cheers,
Robin

[istoo]

IMHO, I believe its more about recognising the mistakes of the past. Yes the EU is a big blundering machine, any big committee suffers that same issue.
We, as first world countries, have the power to do an awful lot of destruction if we so choose. The self control measures, of which the EU is one, help maintain the balance. The EU is being tested very heavily since 2007 and has to evolve to meet the change in the world landscape then, discussion i welcome but there is a real hatred arising which is visible in the western european countries which does have undertones of events pre 1945. That disturbs me deeply. Immigration debate seems to fuel this.

In or out of the EU, immigration will still be an issue. Maintaining what he have as a UK setup will change, like the video tut posted up last month with why america is not great. The UK is in a similar place, great britian is historic, what the UK needs to establish now is what we are and where we are going.

[Scuffers]

Simon,

Your tone is very aggressive, in my opinion, and I don't understand why you are so hostile. Everyone on here is allowed to express their opinion, you included. If you disagree with somebody else of course you challenge it, but why be so shouty about it - do you think that approach persuades anyone to agree with you? More likely it shuts down the discussion because people don't like the aggression.

Cheers,
Robin

really?

Not trying to be antagonistic/hostile, just making the point.

Last think I was doing is SHOUTING, at worse, I could be accused of sarcasm...

Back to the subject, bailouts - we (as in the UK) had to contribute to the IMF loans to the Greeks, so technically, we were not part of the EU bailouts, we did however have to contribute indirectly (via the IMF).

as for wars, the problem with the EU is that it simply does not have the clear thinking/mandate to take on foreign policies, it postures, stuff happens, they they all look at their collective navels and wonder why XYZ happened, Crimea was a classic example, any idiot could see what was going to happen, yet the EU carried on pontificating.

Same with Bosnia, lack of clear direction meant the Serbs paid no attention to the EU what so ever, you only have to look at the Srebrenica massacre, where the Dutch peacekeepers just sat on their hands and watched the Serbs wipe out 8,000+ people.

[tut]

That was appalling to watch, whoever gave those orders should have been lined up and shot. I would probably include the Dutch soldiers who stood by as well.

Orders do not have to be obeyed complicity, especially if they involve harm to yourself or are obviuosly beyond comprehension, but that would be classed as Mutiny and have to be defended in Court. You are still allowed a conscience as a soldier, but you would have to be on very strong footing.

tut

[robin]

really?

Yes.

Not trying to be antagonistic/hostile, just making the point.
Last think I was doing is SHOUTING, at worse, I could be accused of sarcasm...

It reads how it reads. It's a common problem with textual communications - we cannot hear the tone of your voice when you're typing which may be all giggles and smiles ... but it definitely does come across as aggressive when read back - anyway, now you've said you're not being aggressive hopefully people reading your posts will allow for that.

Back to the subject, bailouts - we (as in the UK) had to contribute to the IMF loans to the Greeks, so technically, we were not part of the EU bailouts, we did however have to contribute indirectly (via the IMF).

I don't think the mechanisms by which the IMF work and by which we contribute to them will change whether we're in or out of the EU. So if we're going to get stiffed with a big bill as part of some IMF package, we're going to get stiffed and it doesn't seem relevant to the discussion on whether or not to remain in the EU?

as for wars, the problem with the EU is that it simply does not have the clear thinking/mandate to take on foreign policies, it postures, stuff happens, they they all look at their collective navels and wonder why XYZ happened, Crimea was a classic example, any idiot could see what was going to happen, yet the EU carried on pontificating.

As did the rest of the world. When Ukraine agreed to the destruction of the nuclear weapons that ended up in its territory post collapse of the Soviet Union, it was given a guarantee of sovereignty by members of the non-proliferation treaty. It is particularly ironic that the Russian Federation was one of the four signatories to that guarantee.

Now the EU may have provoked the situation by suggesting to the Ukraine that they may wish to strengthen economic and cultural ties with Europe, but from long before that NATO had been wooing Ukraine and Ukraine had been happy to deepen its relations with NATO. The trouble started when the then president of Ukraine decided to back away from those relationships (presumably having come under some pressure from Russia who were not happy about having their immediate neighbour looking to become part of NATO/EU). This then triggered the popular protests (presumably because the people preferred the prospect of becoming part of the west) and eventually was used by Russia as a pretext to stir up Russian nationalists in, and eventually annexation of, Crimea.

Frankly, nobody fancies a war with Russia and Russia quite fancied to regain control of Crimea (big naval base) when it looked like Ukraine might go all western on them.

I have already said that I think the UK's presence in/out of EU will have no effect on this and thus it is my opinion that it is also not relevant to the subject of our continued membership of the EU.

Same with Bosnia, lack of clear direction meant the Serbs paid no attention to the EU what so ever, you only have to look at the Srebrenica massacre, where the Dutch peacekeepers just sat on their hands and watched the Serbs wipe out 8,000+ people.

I just went and read up on this - the Dutch peacekeepers were part of a UN force I think - so what has this got to do with the EU (beyond their decision to recognise one state and not another, which was incidentally also the position of the US)?

Cheers,
Robin

[c8rkh]

Interesting comments from the French today. The last sentence says it all too me - what the EU is really worried about is others following the UK's lead and leaving - Mr Macron is only trying to hold on to the one thing that stops France's economy from finally bombing, EU subsidies and protectionism.

Mr Macron told Le Monde: "Leaving the EU would mean the 'Guernseyfication' of the UK, which would then be a little country on the world scale. It would isolate itself and become a trading post and arbitration place at Europe's border."

And he said the European Council would have to deliver an ultimatum to the UK about its intentions and that France's President Hollande would be very clear.

"If the UK wants a treaty of commercial access to the European market, the British will have to contribute to the European budget like the Norwegians or the Swiss. If London doesn't want that, then the exit will have to be total," Mr Macron said.

In other comments, made to French radio, Mr Macron said the British referendum marked the end of an era for the EU.

"I believe in Europe, but in its reorganisation," he told RTL radio. "It's the end of an ultra-liberal Europe that has lost its political direction. The European project cannot only be a system of abolishing rules."

He said the debate in Britain was about correcting the effect of ultra-liberal policies "that they pushed us into".

In the event of Brexit, Europe should "act fast to avoid other countries starting a similar process", he said

[Mr Momo]

If Wales, N.Ireland and Scotland vote Remain and England vote Leave, could we dissolve the U.K. in its current form and join the three Remain countries together in a new U.K. and stay in the E.U. ?

[robin]

No.