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: jeep3r
a reply to: DigginFoTroof
The British people have been promised a land of milk and honey by populist politicians that were more interested in their own careers than the welfare of a nation. They offered simple solutions for complex problems in a globalized world. It's not surprising that the result now annoys everybody.
At the time of the referendum, nobody seemed to know what a Brexit actually involves. Even today, not all the details and impacts are known or fully understood. And Cameron did what? Leave it up to the people to decide by means of a referendum? Yeah, right...
I usually don't post in political threads, but I just had to get this off my chest.
Has nobody told Dominic Raab that Britain is an island?
n July 2016, on the eve of his appointment as secretary of state for Brexit, David Davis predicted that the whole thing would be a doddle (...)
Within a year, Davis had changed his tune. It was complicated, he conceded. In June 2017, he told an audience of business leaders that the intricacies of the negotiations “make the Nasa moonshot look quite simple. In July 2018, Davis resigned.
originally posted by: jeep3r
a reply to: DigginFoTroof
I'm not so sure about that, as it seems that some politicians are only recently becoming aware of some of the downsides:
Has nobody told Dominic Raab that Britain is an island?
n July 2016, on the eve of his appointment as secretary of state for Brexit, David Davis predicted that the whole thing would be a doddle (...)
Within a year, Davis had changed his tune. It was complicated, he conceded. In June 2017, he told an audience of business leaders that the intricacies of the negotiations “make the Nasa moonshot look quite simple. In July 2018, Davis resigned.
I doubt that "average joe" had an understanding of the full extent of what Brexit means back in 2016. And he isn't even to blame for that. It just seems like the whole Brexit thing has been presented like a "walk in the park" and that's simply not true.
originally posted by: jeep3r
a reply to: DigginFoTroof
At the time of the referendum, nobody seemed to know what a Brexit actually involves.
originally posted by: jeep3r
I doubt that "average joe" had an understanding of the full extent of what Brexit means back in 2016. And he isn't even to blame for that. It just seems like the whole Brexit thing has been presented like a "walk in the park" and that's simply not true.
originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
I think the EU is afraid that Britain will make a giant success of leaving the EU, their economy will boom, national pride will take off, immigration will be tightened up, ridiculous laws will be overturned and not passed, etc. All of this would make countries like Hungary, Poland, Austria and Italy scratch their heads and start to ask themselves "why are we in the EU again??".. That is what makes the EU afraid.
The EU wants Britain to remain a vassal state and they will do it either by keeping them in the EU or by making a horrible deal, which is why a no-deal may be the best step forward.
originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
So this is what Brexit looks like from an outside perspective.
From the outside this really looks like "we didn't like the way the first vote went, so we will drag our feet, not do our job(s) and see if we can't make people loose heart/interest in this scheme"
-Country voted to leave
-EU doesn't want anyone to leave b/c that would set a precident for nations leaving the union
-Progressive (liberals) in Britain want to remain in the EU
-The result of the Brexit negotiations resulted in a horrible deal for Britain thus making leaving the EU VERY distasteful if not painful - probably to make an example.
-Negotiations may have been sabotaged by both parties (EU and progressives in Britain)
-Terrible exit package is resulting in a call for a new "Brexit" vote to see if people still want to leave after seeing what may lie ahead
-Possible new vote to continue Brexit or remain
I'm not knocking Britain or the people there (even the politicians) as we seem to have people of the same mindset in the states - they won't accept election results but when the shoe is on the other foot, they are vicious if there is any questioning or dissension (to the point of pushing law suits).
It really shows their true colors doesn't it.
Is that a fair analysis of what is going on? I'm sure there are more details involved, I know there are major issues with the financial markets, residency (for both EU and GB citizens), border w/n Ireland and a number of other things. But overall, what I outlined seems an apt description. Can anyone comment on this?
originally posted by: lacrimoniousfinale
Well, here we are two years down the line, and suddenly immigration is no longer a problem. I haven't heard the word mentioned for the last year and a half. And we continue to buy German cars and French houses, and we all go to Spain on holiday three times a year.
It's all very confusing. I think that the Government has wisely taken the pragmatic view that we are better off having a positive relationship with our near neighbours than we are isolating ourselves completely from them. Not least, of course, when 45 percent of our exports go there, and when whole industries depend on employable European staff to exist.
originally posted by: eletheia
Immigration was NEVER the issue ....... although a lot of people used it
to call the Brits racists.
We wished to control our immigration, and not have open borders as Merkle
was foisting on ALL EU members.
originally posted by: jeep3r
I doubt that "average joe" had an understanding of the full extent of what Brexit means back in 2016. And he isn't even to blame for that. It just seems like the whole Brexit thing has been presented like a "walk in the park" and that's simply not true.
originally posted by: Agartha
originally posted by: eletheia
Immigration was NEVER the issue ....... although a lot of people used it
to call the Brits racists.
We wished to control our immigration, and not have open borders as Merkle
was foisting on ALL EU members.
Not true. The UK was always able to control immigration as all other EU countries do, but the UK decided to stop all border checks for EU nationals in 1998 against advice by the EU.
And why do you keep on going on about Merkel's open door policy when it only applied to Germany and only in 2015? The EU Court rejected the open door policy in 2017!
originally posted by: Agartha
Not true. The UK was always able to control immigration as all other EU countries do, but the UK decided to stop all border checks for EU nationals in 1998 against advice by the EU.
And why do you keep on going on about Merkel's open door policy when it only applied to Germany and only in 2015? The EU Court rejected the open door policy in 2017!
Angela Merkel stands firm as Germany's refugee row intensifies
Dispute could bring down coalition government, while leaders of France and Italy debate EU immigration policy
The standoff in Berlin echoed deepening divisions across Europe over how to handle irregular migration. The issue was also the focus of talks in Paris on Friday, at which the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and Italy’s prime minister, Giuseppe Conte, called for radical, Europe-wide changes to EU refugee policy.
We must not contribute to weakening the European Union and purely national measures setting the tone again in Europe,” Seibert said. “Then Europe wouldn’t play the strong role in the world that’s required now.”
In Paris, Macron and Conte sought to patch up a Franco-Italian diplomatic spat sparked this week by the French president accusing Rome of “cynicism and irresponsibility” after anti-immigration minister Matteo Salvini refused the Aquarius migrant rescue ship access to Italian ports, forcing it to head to Spain.
The CSU has said it is not prepared to wait for two weeks. Markus Söder, the minister president of Bavaria and a leading member of the party, said: “Why will we achieve something in two weeks that was not possible in three years?”
The reference was to the refugee crisis in the summer of 2015, when Merkel’s open-border policy allowed almost a million refugees to enter Germany – a decision widely blamed for helping the rightwing, populist and anti-immigrant Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) into the Bundestag in elections last year.
The stubborn stance of the Bavaria-based CSU has been put down to its upcoming state elections, where it faces a drubbing by the AfD to which it has already lost millions of voters.
Söder insisted the CSU was not staging a putsch to topple Merkel. “It’s about restoring trust in the German state of law which has been shattered,” he said.