The Brexit thread

[irie]

The fact is that there was indeed an "oven ready deal" but the EU reneged on it during their long campaign to try to effectively reverse the Brexit vote. Guess that should have been expected.

You can see the deal described on the Europa web site if you care to look. Presented by Barnier in December 2017. But it's all history, we are where we are obviously.

Boris had no intention of following his own deal, he never did, that was the plan all along, his aides mentioned it many times. He enjoyed shouting about how great the deal was beforehand in those nauseating union-jack filled ads he made. He's also enjoying playing the victim and feigning ignorance when the deal surpringly turned out to be hot air.

Incredibly both of these episodes, played out by fat fool like the antics of a Just William story, are extremely popular with his dumb supporters and examples of his great leadership.

You conveniently removed this from my post, because it was "inconvenient" I guess.

[DefTrap]

You conveniently removed this from my post, because it was "inconvenient" I guess.

You know as well as I do he had no intention of seeing it through.

[irie]

You conveniently removed this from my post, because it was "inconvenient" I guess.

You know as well as I do he had no intention of seeing it through.

So you either already knew what was on the Europa web site or looked at the Europa website, and didn't like what you saw, or you didn't look but know better.

[Felix]

Is Polexit next?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58863680

[slowsider]

We're gonna need a bigger bait fridge

[Pirahna]

the Nazis wanted a united Europe.

So did Churchill.

[irie]

So did Churchill.

I rather think he wanted countries to have the freedom to choose.

Not exactly, no. Here is his oft quoted and misquoted speech on I9th September 1946 in Zurich.

http://www.churchill-society-london.org ... onish.html

But strangely, there do seem to be different versions of his speech ...

[Cousin Jack]

Churchill said, amongst other things

"It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom."

The EU seems to have lost that bit.

[slowsider]

Churchill said, amongst other things

"It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom."

The EU seems to have lost that bit.

Brexit was a rejection of the individual's freedom to move around. Consequent was a loss of the freedom for goods services and capital to move around.

[Cousin Jack]

Brexit was a rejection of the individual's freedom to move around. Consequent was a loss of the freedom for goods services and capital to move around.

Brexit was a reaction to the EUs insistence that EU law over-rode everything, and that democracy could go swivel. UK democracy is by no means perfect, but it is a lot better than the EU version.
Poland is having similar thoughts about now, perhaps for the wrong reasons.

[slowsider]

Brexit was a rejection of the individual's freedom to move around. Consequent was a loss of the freedom for goods services and capital to move around.

Brexit was a reaction to the EUs insistence that EU law over-rode everything, and that democracy could go swivel. UK democracy is by no means perfect, but it is a lot better than the EU version.
Poland is having similar thoughts about now, perhaps for the wrong reasons.

Being part of a European family doesn't necessarily mean that England is going to be your daddy.
The UK adopted a number of opt-outs before the big one.

[wheelnut]

Churchill said, amongst other things

"It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom."

The EU seems to have lost that bit.

It’s all about your perception I suppose. Personally, I felt a lot more ‘free’ as part of the EU.

I’ve said it before, but the freedom to roam anywhere on the greatest continent on earth was a solid, tangible benefit.

[Count Steer]

Churchill said, amongst other things

"It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom."

The EU seems to have lost that bit.

It’s all about your perception I suppose. Personally, I felt a lot more ‘free’ as part of the EU.

I’ve said it before, but the freedom to roam anywhere on the greatest continent on earth was a solid, tangible benefit.

I remember the feeling from driving/riding across borders through deserted border posts that were gathering cobwebs. It really did feel liberating....then arriving at the Swiss border.

[DefTrap]

It’s all about your perception I suppose. Personally, I felt a lot more ‘free’ as part of the EU.

I’ve said it before, but the freedom to roam anywhere on the greatest continent on earth was a solid, tangible benefit.

You can roam, you just can't stay. It's back to the days of not being welcome.

[irie]

Not exactly, no. Here is his oft quoted and misquoted speech on I9th September 1946 in Zurich.

http://www.churchill-society-london.org ... onish.html

That's a different thread altogether, I'm not naive enough to think that Churchill didn't have ambitions of maintaining power and he was very afraid of America, who were beginning to really flex their influence and power. I can't recall that speech word for word and I'm not going to read it now, but I do remember a collaboration to some sort of European State but I don't recall him taking a Nazi approach to it.
I'm also no huge fan of Churchill.

Since the above speech does not appear to be the one you were referring to, if you provide a little more info such as approximate date and location, then I should be able to find the speech you are referring to.

hth

[slowsider]

Not exactly, no. Here is his oft quoted and misquoted speech on I9th September 1946 in Zurich.
http://www.churchill-society-london.org ... onish.html

That's a different thread altogether, I'm not naive enough to think that Churchill didn't have ambitions of maintaining power and he was very afraid of America, who were beginning to really flex their influence and power. I can't recall that speech word for word and I'm not going to read it now, but I do remember a collaboration to some sort of European State but I don't recall him taking a Nazi approach to it.
I'm also no huge fan of Churchill.

Since the above speech does not appear to be the one you were referring to, if you provide a little more info such as approximate date and location, then I should be able to find the speech you are referring to.

hth

You told him when and where
https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/ ... of-europe/
"We must build a kind of United States of Europe."

[Yambo]

Maybe Churchill was wrong in his thinking . . .

When the French and Germans decided to climb into bed together and form their club, they didn't ask Britain to join and well into the 60s the French under DeGaulle rejected the British attempts to join.

DeGaulle was maybe right in his thinking . . .

[irie]

Since the above speech does not appear to be the one you were referring to, if you provide a little more info such as approximate date and location, then I should be able to find the speech you are referring to.

hth

Ok, rather than be provocative, I'll explain properly.

The Nazis intended to create a 'united Europe' under the Nazi flag, forcefully. The language in the BBC Poland story has used that concept and flipped it on it's head, to suggest that now anyone breaking up the EU is a Nazi - it doesn't expand on it but maybe it's because they think the EU was set up to counter the Nazis.
Someone posted that's what Churchill was aiming for, I assumed in defence of the BBC story comments, but Churchills plan wasn't to counter Nazism and importantly he wanted a voluntary union, where countries wouldn't be punished for not joining.

Churchill (after WW2) knew that Russia and America were going to be the power players post-WW2 and that speech is about the UK and France leading a united Europe. I still haven't re-read it but from memory in that speech his aim was to create a superpower, he dresses it up as something slightly different, but he knew (or anticipated) what was coming - from the USA and Russia - and indeed it came to pass in things like Suez, where the USA handed the UK and France their arses.

Anyway, my point was Churchill was suggesting something different than the Nazis and he wasn't countering Nazism, so using provocative language to present the EU as a tool against Nazism is poorly thought out by the BBC and the person they quoted. Churchill invited countries to join his idea of a European superpower - and the reasons for that weren't so that you could go on holiday without a visa, nor was it even about Nazism, it was about countering the emerging superpowers that were about to make the UK and France largely irrelevant on the world stage, the world was quite a different place in the 1940's.

Evidently not.

Perhaps it would help if you read the speech (to which a link was posted) which is what I suspect you were referring to?

[Count Steer]

Maybe Churchill was wrong in his thinking . . .

When the French and Germans decided to climb into bed together and form their club, they didn't ask Britain to join and well into the 60s the French under DeGaulle rejected the British attempts to join.

DeGaulle was maybe right in his thinking . . .

Reading the speech, it isn't exactly clear whether Churchill intended that the UK would be part of these 'united states'. Talks a lot about France and Germany but the last bit implies that we would sit there keeping an eye on things like a benevolent parent. It all seems very carefully worded to avoid it specifically including us.

[irie]

Maybe Churchill was wrong in his thinking . . .

When the French and Germans decided to climb into bed together and form their club, they didn't ask Britain to join and well into the 60s the French under DeGaulle rejected the British attempts to join.

DeGaulle was maybe right in his thinking . . .

Reading the speech, it isn't exactly clear whether Churchill intended that the UK would be part of these 'united states'. Talks a lot about France and Germany but the last bit implies that we would sit there keeping an eye on things like a benevolent parent. It all seems very carefully worded to avoid it specifically including us.

What Churchill said on 11th May 1953 in the House of Commons seems perfectly clear to me:

Where do we stand?
We are not members of the European Defence Community, nor do we intend to be merged in a Federal European system. We feel we have a special relation to both. This can be expressed by prepositions, by the preposition "with" but not "of" — we are with them, but not of them. We have our own Commonwealth and Empire. One of the anxieties of France is lest Germany, even partitioned as she is now, will be so strong that France will be outweighed in United Europe or in the European Defence Community. I am sure they could do a lot, if they chose to make themselves stronger. But, anyhow, I have always believed, as an active friend of France for nearly 50 years, that our fortunes lie together.

My highlights.