Page 6 of 93 FirstFirst 123456789101112131656 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 926

Thread: Brexit

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    15,609
    Quote Originally Posted by Balinkay View Post
    Sounds fun. Damn. The debate is quite fun though, old dude says something insane, some bombastic promise (No EU = moar Jobs for young people), people clap, other guy says it's bollocks, people clap. The hell?

    Points system? Sounds dehumanising.

    Edit: Damn, Greece has given them a lot of ammo. Never liked the uptight slouches.
    Don't like the Greeks? Tragedy

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Khazad-dm
    Posts
    10,765
    Quote Originally Posted by Wembley 86 View Post
    Don't like the Greeks? Tragedy
    Do you like any of your neighbours? We've been slaughtering each other for well over a thousand years.

    Edit: Damn, this guy's "We Brits are great. Britain > all. Rule Britannia!" rhetoric is getting kind of old.
    Etiamsi omnes, ego non

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    15,609
    Quote Originally Posted by Balinkay View Post
    Do you like any of your neighbours? We've been slaughtering each other for well over a thousand years.

    Edit: Damn, this guy's "We Brits are great. Britain > all. Rule Britannia!" rhetoric is getting kind of old.
    Oh the English love the French and the Germans! Ha ha!

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Khazad-dm
    Posts
    10,765
    Quote Originally Posted by Wembley 86 View Post
    Oh the English love the French and the Germans! Ha ha!
    Seems to be mutual.
    Etiamsi omnes, ego non

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    15,609
    Quote Originally Posted by Balinkay View Post
    Seems to be mutual.
    Unfortunately, yes.

    That said the European Union has done a good job of keeping the peace.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Khazad-dm
    Posts
    10,765
    Quote Originally Posted by Wembley 86 View Post
    Unfortunately, yes.

    That said the European Union has done a good job of keeping the peace.
    Welp, no wars within the Union just yet.

    What did you think of the debate? The dude seemed incredibly sleazy, but a good talker - quite admire that. He's a politician, I know, but the way he covered up some of the supposed crap he was spouting was brilliant. Not to mention how he weaseled (sp?) his way out of a few tight corners. Tried to tap into the nationalist spirit too - bit of a cheap and rather transparent trick that but seems to work.
    Etiamsi omnes, ego non

  7. #57
    http://www.rusemb.org.uk/fnapr/5481

    PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS
    11.03.2016
    The Russian Embassy’s statement On HMG policy of dragging Russia into the Brexit debate

    For quite a while the British Government has been referring to perceived Russia/the Kremlin’s interest when facing a problem of selling its policies to the public opinion at home, otherwise suspect and unconvincing. It is done at various levels of the Government including Foreign and Defense Secretaries. What all the pronouncements of this sort have in common is the claim to know better than the Russian Government where our national interest lies and what our policies are. In a sense Russia is scapegoated for almost everything that has gone wrong in Britain and the West over the past 25 years, i.e. the War in Iraq, misadventure in Libya, global financial crisis, advent of deglobalisation (the term, coined by Gordon Brown), the Ukrainian and Syrian crises, and now the rise of anti-establishment sentiment in the West and the migration crisis of the EU.

    That behaviour has reached a new high now that Russia is being dragged into the domestic debate on Brexit. Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond, speaking at the Chatham House on 2 March said, that “the only country who would like us to leave the EU is Russia.” And that, according to him, “should tell us all we need to know.” First of all, why is the wicked Russia thesis used to explain a Government policy, be it the presumed deal struck with the EU partners or a more fundamental issue of the EU membership, which must be defended on its merits? Secondly, why is it all the British public need to know?
    And why shift the topic? The EU is not a military alliance, which is Nato. It is not about the special relationship with the US. Neither is the British nuclear deterrent involved, not is, for that matter, London’s permanent seat at the UN Security Council at stake.
    It goes without saying that we have a huge problem with this strategy/tactics. It seems that the present British Government has a vested interest in a disfunctional bilateral relationship with Russia. Another conclusion one may draw therefrom is that the authorities thus admit that they cannot win the argument in an open and straightforward debate. Of course, we wouldn’t oblige. We find this unfair towards both Russia, with whom Britain maintains diplomatic relations, and the British people, who deserve a better treatment from their own government.
    We expect our British partners to explain themselves. In the meantime, we’d like the British people to know that those pronouncements have nothing to do with Russia’s policy. As a matter of fact, our Government doesn’t have an opinion on Britain’s place in the EU. We have nothing to do with the very idea to hold this referendum. It is for the British to decide. We’ll accept any outcome. We have enough problems of our own to mind somebody else’s business. More than that, we believe that if our Western partners had minded their own business well enough, all of us would have had fewer international problems on our hands.
    It doesn’t mean that we don’t have problems dealing with the EU. Overall, we share the concern over the bias in the form of political expediency/correctness that stifles debate on real issue, forces real life into the straitjacket of ideological constructs and schemes. In reality, these leads to crises like the EU unilateralist foray, under the previous Brussels team, into the Ukrainian affairs.
    We are even blamed for the migration crisis in Europe. And that contrary to the fact that it started well before our limited military intervention in Syria on 30 September 2015, which radically changed the dynamics in that country, helped establish the IGSS and bring hope of peace. Was it not the West, who by way of Libyan intervention as a precedent misled the Syrians on both sides and then outsourced the regime change to its regional allies, who have their own accounts to settle, have designs on Syrian territory and still insist that Syria become a Sunni state. Russia, on the contrary, is hugely contributing to finding a political solution in Syria and, thus, alleviating the migration crisis. This is done at least at four levels: fighting Isis (our limited Air Force deployment), working in tandem with the US in the IGSS, mediating support for the ceasefire at the grass-root level on the ground and providing humanitarian aid. We’d like to know what the British record on Syria is.
    We wouldn’t have dwelt on that, had HMG not alluded to the Russian threat to British national security at every opportunity. We leave it to the conscience of our British partners. As to the Brexit debate, we find any outside interference unacceptable and counterproductive for the cause of the Government, especially given the fact that the issue is viewed by many in Britain in existential terms.
    This statement is circulated to both referendum campaigns, to all the main political parties and British media.

    11 March 2016

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    15,609
    Quote Originally Posted by Balinkay View Post
    Welp, no wars within the Union just yet.

    What did you think of the debate? The dude seemed incredibly sleazy, but a good talker - quite admire that. He's a politician, I know, but the way he covered up some of the supposed crap he was spouting was brilliant. Not to mention how he weaseled (sp?) his way out of a few tight corners. Tried to tap into the nationalist spirit too - bit of a cheap and rather transparent trick that but seems to work.
    Yes, he's quite a clever orator and I thought he handled the audience pretty well on the whole.

    Wasn't a very high quality debate though and he was able to duck and dive around the detail, particularly the economics of such a move.

    They've got momentum though as a campaign, no doubt about it.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Wembley 86 View Post
    Unfortunately, yes.

    That said the European Union has done a good job of keeping the peace.
    I'd have thought that was NATO.You can see the great shakes the Europeans made of the Yugoslav civil war.8500 slaughtered while the Dutch peacekeepers polished their earings. That was under a UN flag but the yanks had to bring the killings to an end.


    For anyone who still hasn't cottoned on the vote is between a free democracy and an undemocratic super state.Anyone who doesn't think so can't have read what the founders said and what the high ranking eurocrats still say now.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    15,609
    Are you aware of the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty?

    Sounds like you're not tbh?

    When was the last major clash of arms on the European continent too?

    Seems like we've found a lasting way of keeping the peace in that sense.
    Last edited by Wembley 86; 6th June 2016 at 05:05 PM.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •