It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is this the end of the "special relationship" ?

page: 13
27
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
Who used the term flooded? Not me, anywhere in this thread or elsewhere.


I did. Thought that was clear..




posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: grainofsand
Who used the term flooded? Not me, anywhere in this thread or elsewhere.


I did. Thought that was clear..

Fair one, I shall treat your comments as I do when I read a tabloid newspaper then, sensationalist, and using evocative unnecessary language instead of reasoned argument.
Yep, lame, but I'm glad to know it as you apparently appear so unashamed.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: SprocketUK
Maybe it's your lack of knowledge that makes you so blindly pro eu?


Mildly pro-EU at best.



The Vienna convention on the law of treaties of 1969 sets out the framework for acquired rights which were translated into vested rights when Greenland withdrew from the eec.


Ah yes, I see. So do the seven inch mordibutts polish the greenplate tomorrow, then??

Really, what are you saying ...

Now, the VCLT is "merely" a treaty that spells out whom can make treaties, whom can't and how to maintain, amend, dissolve them etc. So, it does NOT set out any framework for acquired rights - it sets out a "framework" for ... making and breaking treaties. Acquired rights and their conversion into vested right might be part of a treaty RULED by the VCLT, that's all.

Also keep in mind that when Greenland withdrew from the EEC, they remained subject to the EU treaties - through association of Overseas Countries and Territories with the EU. And they will probably rejoin the EU, as the benefits outweigh the costs.


You are welcome, by the way


I know.

But tell me, how about them mordibutts?


The convention is what establishes the rights of people who have settled down to remain even if a country leaves the EU.


Really thought you'd have known that.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: grainofsand
Who used the term flooded? Not me, anywhere in this thread or elsewhere.


I did. Thought that was clear..

Fair one, I shall treat your comments as I do when I read a tabloid newspaper then, sensationalist, and using evocative unnecessary language instead of reasoned argument.
Yep, lame, but I'm glad to know it as you apparently appear so unashamed.


Ad hominem. Please mind manners and decorum.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

Actually, no, the VCLT does NOT establish the rights of people etc. - it merely is a treaty to define who can create, mandate and dissolve treaties, and how.

If you're not a citizen of a nation, you're a guest. As it is now, the Brits are allowed to work wherever they want, they can live wherever they want, in the EU. Even when they're sick, without work, on a pension or even incapable of work, and should be treated as equals.

But if the UK retreats from the EU, they loose that right, unless they re-negotiate it. Now, I can't imagine that we, on the continent, would be uncivilised and kick the Brits out - we even allow millions of other refugees here, after all - but in principle that's what COULD happen. Especially if nationalists would have a say in it, they seem to think that a nation should only be populated by those born there.

Anyway: what treaty were you referring to - in what treaty does it say that EU citizens can remain even if the treaty that regulates that is abandoned? Source?



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:11 PM
link   
i always interpreted our 'special relationship' with the states as coat-hanging on the part of successive uk governments. basking in what they presumed to be the reflected glory of the worlds number one superpower. ass-kissing for the most part.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: grainofsand

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: grainofsand
Who used the term flooded? Not me, anywhere in this thread or elsewhere.


I did. Thought that was clear..

Fair one, I shall treat your comments as I do when I read a tabloid newspaper then, sensationalist, and using evocative unnecessary language instead of reasoned argument.
Yep, lame, but I'm glad to know it as you apparently appear so unashamed.


Ad hominem. Please mind manners and decorum.

What are you a mod now hahaha!
Counter my arguments and comments or go click alert if you feel unsettled lol
Until you refrain from inventing terms while implying I used them I shall continue to call you out.
Go on, click alert, I reckon the mods will laugh at you in their private forum lol

edit on 26.4.2016 by grainofsand because: typo



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Please?



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: grainofsand

Please?

Please what?

*Edit*
Perhaps you wish me to refrain from calling you out when you introduce terms such as "floods of immigrants" into a debate where I have not used such terms?
I'm more than happy to enjoy mature reasoned and rational debate if you are, just don't invent rubbish into the conversation.
edit on 26.4.2016 by grainofsand because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

I would even have begged if that was necessary - as long as we can keep up manners and decorum, I'm happy. Mind you, I'm the type of guy that, when he gets into a dispute in a pub, will yell at that big, ugly guy I offended: "Come on, you big ape, go outside, we'll settle it there! Oh, and if I'm not there in 15 minutes - consider yourself the winner!"

Well, back to the discussion then. You responded to my suggestion that the EU might kick out UK residents if the UK left the EU. You said it was fearmongering, and it was lame etc. I don't really get that, it's merely observation: if the UK ends a treaty, it should face the consequences.

So, yes, as it is now the UK citizens are also EU citizens and can live here, enjoy. And we can live in the UK, enjoy. But if the UK ends that treaty - well, it's simple: I can't live in the UK anymore, unless I get a permit of sorts, and the Brits can't live here anymore unless they get some sort of permit. You can't have it both ways.

Same goes for the investments the EU makes in the UK: as it is now, they are simply investments in the EU. If the UK leaves the EU, these investments will simply end. But on the bright side, your very competent national government will have a few extra bob in their pockets - to spend on re-enforcement of the borders, the police, and of course public workers whom have to deal with the new paperwork involved with allowing EU citizens to work in the UK vice versa. I don't really see any advantages in that, but if you do, fine with me.

edit on 26-4-2016 by ForteanOrg because: he emotionally messed up the UK with the EU



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

Yeah I'll take any challenges in any post EU Britain. I don't expect it to be an easy picnic.
I believe in my community.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

If you are just going to play thick in order to try and score some meaningless point, there is no point debating with you.


Go google it, then google Greenland exiting the EEC.

But to play along, the gist of one of the many things agreed at Vienna was that those who settled under a treaty were free to remain after that treaty had been torn up, ie a New treaty could not be imposed retrospectively.
o EU citizens in the UK will not be loaded onto cattle trucks and sent back to Europe and neither will expat Brits be sent the other way.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 02:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK
a reply to: ForteanOrg

If you are just going to play thick



Ad hominem. I believe I have sufficiently explained what the VCLT is, and how it has nothing to do with any rights of UK citizens to remain in the EU after the UK leaves Britain. I also already explained that if the UK leaves, they'll have to re-negotiate such rights. Greenland actually signed a new treaty: the Greenland treaty. The Treaty arranged for the exit of Greenland and amended earlier treaties of the European Communities.

If the UK leaves the EU, your current rights will disappear, unless they are part of other existing treaties. Now, I've asked this before: do you have a source or name for the treaty in which is says that UK citizens can remain living as equal citizens in the EU if they leave the EU?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 02:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: ForteanOrg
I believe in my community.


So do I. It's simply a slightly larger community



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: Flavian

My aren't you the semantic one, okay, we will have the same legal control of immigration as any other nation signed up to UN conventions, say Canada, or Australia. Try rocking up in one of those countries expecting to get minimum wage work lol.
You knew exactly what I meant, and yes you have sidetracked with refugees, absolutely ridiculous, this is a thread about potentially leaving the EU and controlling the hundreds of thousands moving here every year.

The UK will have control over immigration in the event of an exit same as every other country outside of the EU.
I'm happy with that.
Your initial statement which provoked our exchange was a blatant attempt to suggest that leaving would make no difference to how immigration is controlled. You know damn well that is untrue, and threw refugees into the discussion solely to muddy the waters of an EU debate.


No, you asked for proof and i provided it. This is basic reading comprehension. I don't really understand what you are failing to grasp there? Just because the Treaties contains the words refugees, they aren't solely about refugees. They also cover migration.

Also (and thanks for indirectly pointing this out) this thread is actually about the end of the special relationship, not simply about migration.

And my thoughts on that are no, it would not mean the end (or even approaching it). The UK and US are too closely tied in too many areas for a diplomatic spat to overturn things.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:27 AM
link   

And my thoughts on that are no, it would not mean the end (or even approaching it). The UK and US are too closely tied in too many areas for a diplomatic spat to overturn things.

We find agreement



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK
You're right it's none of our business in the US to tell anyone what's best for their country, least of all Obama with the disastrous policy he has used during his Presidential stay.

Do what you guys need to do to make your country the best it can be and screw all the others blocking you!!!
edit on 9211630America/Chicago04America/Chicago285 by Byteme285 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: SprocketUK
a reply to: ForteanOrg

If you are just going to play thick



Ad hominem. I believe I have sufficiently explained what the VCLT is, and how it has nothing to do with any rights of UK citizens to remain in the EU after the UK leaves Britain. I also already explained that if the UK leaves, they'll have to re-negotiate such rights. Greenland actually signed a new treaty: the Greenland treaty. The Treaty arranged for the exit of Greenland and amended earlier treaties of the European Communities.

If the UK leaves the EU, your current rights will disappear, unless they are part of other existing treaties. Now, I've asked this before: do you have a source or name for the treaty in which is says that UK citizens can remain living as equal citizens in the EU if they leave the EU?


You can take your ad hom claptrap and shove it matey.

You know damn well that the conference and the treaties resulting from it during the Greenland secession Guarantee the rights of all people already settled in either the leaving territory or that which remains.

If nothing else, the constant twisting of the truth by you remain quislings should show everyone what a bad idea it is to do anything other than leave.

If your argument was so solid, you wouldn't have to obfuscate and dissemble so much.



posted on Apr, 28 2016 @ 05:22 AM
link   
No...Never..As I think, Special relationship never ends because it will present ever and ever in our mind.



posted on Apr, 28 2016 @ 06:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shelvibarle
No...Never..As I think, Special relationship never ends because it will present ever and ever in our mind.


That's a good way of looking at it.

To be fair, apart from a couple of blips I think we would always have each other's backs if push comes to shove.




top topics



 
27
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join