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.
originally posted by: crazyewok
More control over our laws.
originally posted by: crazyewok
Less bureaucracy
originally posted by: crazyewok
One less layer of government.
originally posted by: crazyewok
Smaller decentralised government
originally posted by: crazyewok
Protection of UK sovereignty.
originally posted by: crazyewok
More separation from the disastrous currency that is the Euro.
originally posted by: Rocker2013
The UK is and always will be a sovereign nation.
Involvement in the EU has not changed this and to claim it somehow has is a ridiculous suggestion often repeated by the fanatics.
originally posted by: Rocker2013
I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean.
In what way is our involvement in the EU an "inconvenient" layer of government?
originally posted by: Rocker2013
It facilitates common laws and standards across the European Union which in-turn facilitates a large amount of business between our nations.
originally posted by: Rocker2013
How?
Our government will not shrink just because we stop dealing with the EU.
How on Earth do you imagine leaving the EU would magically shrink our own government?
originally posted by: Rocker2013
Everything you've listed here is basically nothing more than the usual nonsense, the same vague and reactionary simple-minded nationalism we've come to expect from the Brexit bunch.
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Soloprotocol
Only after Germany went off on a massive spree of invading countrys.
The UK didnt get involved for the "LOLZ"
Plus the UK hasn’t been the war starter anyway in Europe in recent history. The War starters are normally Germany or France.
originally posted by: ThePeaceMaker
Hell the vote is a sham anyway, I can already see the result. It's in the governments best interest to stay in the EU, therefore WE WILL BE STAYING in the EU.
There are other additional features of the EU governance system which support this tendency towards authoritarian and expansive political power being exercised by those with only tenuous democratic connections. Foremost amongst these is the power of judges.
This power derives chiefly from the difficulties inherent in crafting treaties which must be acceded to by 27 separate nation states. Precise language is more likely to increase the number of potential points of dispute, whereas a vague text encourages member states to either push back their concerns to a later date or to rely on the clause being interpreted in line with their own wishes when it finally appears before either a national court or the European Court of Justice.
In a system where treaties are constructed with deliberate ambiguity, the task of deciding what lawmakers meant falls to the ECJ. When considering the court, it should first be recognised that the European legal tradition is dissimilar to the British tradition. It is also, thanks to recent interpretation, superior to it. As is the case with the national justice systems of the continental countries, the ECJ is a civil law court, interpreting a civil code as each case arises, rather than being constrained by the consideration of precedent in past cases.
As there is little new under the sun, a system based on precedent will, of nature, move slowly and act against judicial radicalism as judges will be constrained by the actions of more conservative predecessors. In a civil law system, judges can shift the accepted interpretation of a statute, often very radically, in one sitting. This has the effect of creating a more activist judiciary and bringing about a further de facto ability to make political weather to another non-elected actor.
originally posted by: Soloprotocol
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Soloprotocol
Only after Germany went off on a massive spree of invading countrys.
The UK didnt get involved for the "LOLZ"
Germany was taking back land it lost (stolen) after WW1..ie. West Prussia, The Rhineland, Alsace Lorraine, Silesia, Schleswig and Danzig. Ok they went a bit mental with Czecheslovakia More strategic than anything else.
I was pointing out a fact. Britain Declared War on Germany in Both wars.
originally posted by: Astyanax
The article says absolutely nothing about any world war. This is about Britain having a say in European collective defence agreements and general policy. And the Prime Minister is absolutely right on that score.
originally posted by: bastion
Hear, hear - I absolutely despise the man and thnk he's a cretin but can't fathom him anything as stupid as WW3, that's his daftest claim ever - and even for somone as comemptful as him, I have more faith in him than to make such a stupid, overblown statement.
Go back in history, Crimea, Napoleon, WW1, WW 2, did Britain have defence agreements then? long before the thrice damned EU?
'Brexit' could trigger World War Three, warns David Cameron
originally posted by: SprocketUK
originally posted by: Soloprotocol
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Soloprotocol
Only after Germany went off on a massive spree of invading countrys.
The UK didnt get involved for the "LOLZ"
Germany was taking back land it lost (stolen) after WW1..ie. West Prussia, The Rhineland, Alsace Lorraine, Silesia, Schleswig and Danzig. Ok they went a bit mental with Czecheslovakia More strategic than anything else.
I was pointing out a fact. Britain Declared War on Germany in Both wars.
Wow. Sounds like Ken Livingstone hacked your account.
originally posted by: rigel4
a reply to: Soloprotocol
Twisted truth there bud... showing your own twisted hate for the
UK.. biggot muchly