Good for you.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Good for you.
I wish ye would to be honest.
If Englanders had shared that notion throughout history we wouldn't still be getting dragged down into the shit with you now.
I know I shouldn't bother explaining to people who aren't taken serious why they aren't being taken serious... but sometimes I can't help myself.
May just flat out said she wasn't looking for the removal of the backstop but changes to it. Not sure if that was purposeful or she messed up.
That's quite a retreat and it isn't what the Brady amendment ot ERG support was based on.
That's quite a retreat and it isn't what the Brady amendment ot ERG support was based on.
@Bola The issue is that you came into the thread with provocative posts and smugness on subjects that we have discussed about in relative depth. The smugness won't be well received.
For me it's just pure anger at this stage. The sense of entitlement that enables them to totally disregard the security and peace of a region their national is responsible for destabalising, because "they deserve a better deal" is one thing.
But when they don't even know or understand what deal that is, or how it it will work or what it will mean in the long term is just stunningly frustrating.
If they were evil, calculating geniuses, hell bent on screwing over whoever they could to achieve their brilliant scheme I would have more respect for them. I'd be pissed off but there'd be grudging respect alongside my hatred.
But seeing the peace process go up in smoke because we have to be nice to blithering, barely literate idiots who don't understand even the simplest elements of their own arguments is very, very difficult to stomach.
Good question.
My primary objections would be:
1. Whatever we think of NATO, it has been reasonably successful in maintaining peace; at least between major nations.
I do acknowledge that President Trump is not an advocate but he has and continues to challenge nations that do not meet their obligations. Germany for example. Why do we need to reinvent the wheel.
2. The biggest threat to NATO is not the Russia or Putin. It is the increasing weakness of NATO due to many things but funding is a significant problem.
Any potential organisation that would ultimately compete with NATO for resources would by definition weaken it.
My reading of President Macron's motivation for a European Army is to ensure that Europe (the EU) could defend itself against either the USA or Russia or China.
That being the case, it highlights the view that Europe needs act like a Federal State and IMHO that is totally contrary to the right of individual states self determination.
Apology if that is long winded.
Was May hoping the ERG wouldn't be listneing?
I mean look at the absolute state of this.
There are literally days left until Britain stumbles drunk out of the EU and this is the level of discourse we're dealing with.
But smugness and vitirolic posts about provocative anti-brexit views are ok?
How can we be anti-brexit if you still haven't told us what brexit is?
We're anti-idiot, not anti-brexit.
Oh dear. Another angry poster
Thanks for the reply.
There's one point that I'd highlight - the last one - why does that lead you to believe that the EU would be one federal state and contrary to individual self determination when NATO is an organisation of many different countries all of whom are individual.
They probably don't listen to facts or they ignore them so maybe May was counting on that.
It isn't factually correct though. If European countries decide to act like a federal state then they exercised their self determination. There is this strange idea among a part of the population that choosing to be with others and exercising your sovereignty collectively goes against self determination, that's wrong.
None of it is acceptable which is why I didn't insult you or looked down on you. I tried to engage with you despite the fact that I didn't like the way you talked to others.
You are killing it! I know it's not really a laughing matter but feck me, talk about going for the jugular. Cutting posts...
He's got a point. I gave you the benefit of the doubt but you're acting like a WUM right now. Expand on your points, engage in a conversation, or just bail... The one liners aren't proving him wrong are they?
Oh, yeah, if I were Irish or British I'd be seething at this point too.
It's the millions and millions of Brits who have no part in this but are caught up in it who I feel for most. I have the luxury of not being that affected, but that doesn't make me immune to being irritated by their bullsheetery.
1) Your objection isn't an objection.
2) Any potential EU army would automatically be made up of NATO members and thereby strengthen NATO forces.
Your reading is wrong. No one is crazy enough to even contemplate military conflict with the USA, there's no point in planing for something that would be doom. Lastly, if "Europe needs act like a Federal State and IMHO that is totally contrary to the right of individual states self determination" why aren't you against the same thing in the form of NATO, which you seem to like?
You are killing it! I know it's
If you look back, I have engaged most poste
You are killing it! I know it's not really a laughing matter but feck me, talk about going for the jugular. Cutting posts...
He's got a point. I gave you the benefit of the doubt but you're acting like a WUM right now. Expand on your points, engage in a conversation, or just bail... The one liners aren't proving him wrong are they?
If you look.back through this thread today, I have engaged most posters in a conversation. I would have with him, but I struggled to see a point to answer to, it was mostly bile and he's blown his chance for a sensible debate today
And by the way. I acknowledge that the process of leaving the EU has not been our finest hour.
But. I would certainly not bet against us making a success of it.
Shame, you'd get good odds...
Because it is the right of each state to determine it's own defence strategy and defence forces.
Aha. A European Federal State with a European Army. Now things become clear.
But what's the difference with NATO - or put it another way, what if NATO was only made up of individual EU states.
You are dreaming.
If they want to strengthen NATO then don't invent a new Army, strengthen NATO.
Getting nervous are we.
I'm missing the relevance of your answer.
It doesn't matter if what you have said is factually correct (it fecking isn't) because the whole thing is a bullshit, straw man, non-event of an argument that has no real bearing on anything other than to give idiots another stupid soundbite to obfuscate and bluff their way around arguments they lack the ability to engage with properly.
The biggest threat to anything is this Roger Stoneism of modern politics. Scumbags have managed to hack the system by appealing to the very lowest common denominator of developed societies and giving them a dumb, rotten and very loud voice - then finger pointing and villainising anyone who points out the obvious stupidity of their shite.
It's worked so well that anyone with an IQ higher than they can count has been stunned into paralysis and clowns like Trump, Farage and the DUP have been given a chair at the table rather than the padded walls they deserve.
The greatest trick they ever pulled was convincing decent people that by mocking idiots and ignoring their racist, stupid, bigoted, sexist, xenophobic, outdated, misogynistic, nasty opinions they were somehow to blame for letting them in.
It's bollocks. It's taken us thousands of years to reach a level where decent, intelligent people understand right from wrong and in the space of a half decade, we've regressed by getting dragged into discourse with the lowest of the low.
Trump and Brexit both exist because small people hate stuff and their hate has been legitimised by scumbags who will profit from manipulating stupidity.
But it isn't.
My view and I have worked for a company involved in major defence programmes for many years is that NATO has and should continue to be the primary defence organisation for the west.
Any new organisations will only fragment and weaken its relevance.
Getting? Where the feck have you been the last 2 years or so?
Looks like Arlene Foster has realised the backstop isn't going anywhere and now looking for a deal.
How much is it going to cost?
How much is it going to cost?
Is anyone really surprised the ERG are now asking for the backstop to be removed after initially asking for a time limit?
They do not want a deal.
They do not want a deal.
I was referring to the UK making a success of being outside the EU which could well happen.
Strengthening NATO wouldn't be the main objective of it, it would be a automatic consequence.
I may be dreaming but at least i'm not posting delirious nonsense.
Don't know about happy but I just find it enjoyable that there's a group of people who are in seemingly still shocked to find out that Corbyn is in fact a socialist.
Mate, the fact you still believe there is an upside to Brexit confuses the hell out of me if I'm being honest, especially when you keep reminding us that you're a remainer who voted remain. What does this success look like and what needs to happen for this occur?
If you've already answered that question just link your post in response...
Is there? Speaking for myself I was hoping (like an idiot) that he'd actually, you know, do something, wrt avoiding this impending no deal brexit.
I think a lot of people are getting to that stage mate. It's became maddening to hear the same shite over and over again. They all have similar opinions about the Irish border problem and it's always either A) There is no Irish border problem, we just won't have a border. B) I've just now thought up a brilliant solution that all the experts couldn't think of over the last 3 years or C) Moan about the backstop and say it's unnecessary/pointless but then just ignore any questions asking what the alternative could be. Or usually various combinations of all three.
Like most i've long since came to the conclusion that the majority of them don't give a single feck about what happens in Ireland.
Apart from Canada the US and Turkey it practically is made up of EU countries or at least countries that would identify as being on the continent of Europe.
Why the need for an EU force? Trump? He won't be there forever. Deal with the US - not Trump.