How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 10)

[JuanCarlosFandango]

bhstewie said:

Interesting article with some mention of some of the Queen's previous comments on Europe to the then German ambassador.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/may/19/th...

In 1988. 31 years ago. And remainers claim an actual vote from 3 years ago is no longer relevant to current public opinion?

We have had that future already.

[FiF]

Robertj21a said:

Elysium said:

Or, if you open you mind, perhaps you could accept that is why some people want a second referendum.

I can accept leaving the EU with no deal and the potential disruption that will bring if it is the will of the majority. We have no idea if that is the case. If Farage polls more than 50% of the EU election votes, that would suggest it may be, but a second ref is the only way to be sure.

Meanwhile, no-one, including Nigel, has solved the Northern Ireland issues that at this point make no-deal impossible.

Sorry, you're just getting ridiculously boring now.

We had the vote back in 2016. Most evidence suggests that little has changed since that time, so there's no need to go back for your beloved 2nd/3rd/15th referendum. I'd be the first to agree with you if there had been an obvious, sizeable, shift since 2016 - there hasn't.

You're just sounding like an old record that got stuck in a groove. Despite your regular protests to the contrary, you come over as just like those Remainers who simply won't accept the decision, after a democratic vote.

I'll accept his word that he, personally, isn't such. However the views do play into the hands and the narrative of those who do want exactly that. It's tiresome indeed.

[Elysium]

Robertj21a said:

Elysium said:

Or, if you open you mind, perhaps you could accept that is why some people want a second referendum.

I can accept leaving the EU with no deal and the potential disruption that will bring if it is the will of the majority. We have no idea if that is the case. If Farage polls more than 50% of the EU election votes, that would suggest it may be, but a second ref is the only way to be sure.

Meanwhile, no-one, including Nigel, has solved the Northern Ireland issues that at this point make no-deal impossible.

Sorry, you're just getting ridiculously boring now.

We had the vote back in 2016. Most evidence suggests that little has changed since that time, so there's no need to go back for your beloved 2nd/3rd/15th referendum. I'd be the first to agree with you if there had been an obvious, sizeable, shift since 2016 - there hasn't.

You're just sounding like an old record that got stuck in a groove. Despite your regular protests to the contrary, you come over as just like those Remainers who simply won't accept the decision, after a democratic vote.

If you are bored by my posts then I have an easy solution - don't reply to them.

Ironically, your post is far more repetitive and predictable than mine. Let me spell it out:

1. We voted to leave the EU in 2016. I have not forgotten
2. The Govt negotiated terms of withdrawal, as everybody expected.
3. You don't like them and you want to walk away without a deal. Something the leave campaign said would never happen.
4. The failure of the negotiations and the idea of leaving with no-deal is self evidently a significant change in circumstances. But you choose to ignore that and claim nothing has changed. Because it suits you.
5. You will support any argument that walking away with no-deal is mandated by the 2016 referendum, because it is what you want.
6. You don't know if your view is in the majority and you don't care.
7. You are against a second referendum because you are scared that no-deal will not be in the majority and you won't get what you want.

You don't care about democracy. If you did, you would have had no problem with my post. Instead, you resorted to the sort of tired, pointless rhetoric that is endlessly rolled out by people in your position. You suggested I simply could not accept the democratic vote.

It's pathetic.

Edited by Elysium on Sunday 19th May 20:31

[DeepEnd]

Elysium said:

If you are bored by my posts then I have an easy solution - don't reply to them.

Ironically, your post is far more repetitive and predictable than mine. Let me spell it out:

1. We voted to leave the EU in 2016. I have not forgotten
2. The Govt negotiated terms of withdrawal, as everybody expected.
3. You don't like them and you want to walk away without a deal. Something the leave campaign said would never happen.
4. The failure of the negotiations and the desire for no deal is self evidently a significant change in circumstances. But you choose to inore it and claim nothing has changed. Because it suits you.
4. You will support any argument that walking away with no-deal is mandated by the 2016 referendum, because it is what you want.
5. You don't know if your view is in the majority and you don't care.
6. You are against a second referendum because you are scared that no-deal will not be in the majority and you won't get what you want.

You don't care about democracy. If you did, you would have had no problem with my post. Instead, you resorted to the sort of tired, pointless rhetoric that is endlessly rolled out by people in your position. You suggested I simply could not accept the democratic vote.

It's pathetic.

Agreed - I was going to type something similar.

The broken record / nothing has changed is apparent, but it is not the remain side who are stuck and out of ideas.

Voting for Farage who literally has no plan or policies is what is now being championed as what to do next.

[Hoink]

Elysium said:

Robertj21a said:

Elysium said:

Or, if you open you mind, perhaps you could accept that is why some people want a second referendum.

I can accept leaving the EU with no deal and the potential disruption that will bring if it is the will of the majority. We have no idea if that is the case. If Farage polls more than 50% of the EU election votes, that would suggest it may be, but a second ref is the only way to be sure.

Meanwhile, no-one, including Nigel, has solved the Northern Ireland issues that at this point make no-deal impossible.

Sorry, you're just getting ridiculously boring now.

We had the vote back in 2016. Most evidence suggests that little has changed since that time, so there's no need to go back for your beloved 2nd/3rd/15th referendum. I'd be the first to agree with you if there had been an obvious, sizeable, shift since 2016 - there hasn't.

You're just sounding like an old record that got stuck in a groove. Despite your regular protests to the contrary, you come over as just like those Remainers who simply won't accept the decision, after a democratic vote.

If you are bored by my posts then I have an easy solution - don't reply to them.

Ironically, your post is far more repetitive and predictable than mine. Let me spell it out:

1. We voted to leave the EU in 2016. I have not forgotten
2. The Govt negotiated terms of withdrawal, as everybody expected.
3. You don't like them and you want to walk away without a deal. Something the leave campaign said would never happen.
4. The failure of the negotiations and the idea of leaving with no-deal is self evidently a significant change in circumstances. But you choose to ignore that and claim nothing has changed. Because it suits you.
5. You will support any argument that walking away with no-deal is mandated by the 2016 referendum, because it is what you want.
6. You don't know if your view is in the majority and you don't care.
7. You are against a second referendum because you are scared that no-deal will not be in the majority and you won't get what you want.

You don't care about democracy. If you did, you would have had no problem with my post. Instead, you resorted to the sort of tired, pointless rhetoric that is endlessly rolled out by people in your position. You suggested I simply could not accept the democratic vote.

It's pathetic.

Edited by Elysium on Sunday 19th May 20:31

Except the withdrawal agreement is really a withdrawal agreement. It is the UK agreeing to sign away its future for an unspecified time where we have no power to control anything.

I think if the withdrawal agreement wasn't so bad then there would be less arguing on both sides.

[Robertj21a]

Elysium said:

Robertj21a said:

Elysium said:

Or, if you open you mind, perhaps you could accept that is why some people want a second referendum.

I can accept leaving the EU with no deal and the potential disruption that will bring if it is the will of the majority. We have no idea if that is the case. If Farage polls more than 50% of the EU election votes, that would suggest it may be, but a second ref is the only way to be sure.

Meanwhile, no-one, including Nigel, has solved the Northern Ireland issues that at this point make no-deal impossible.

Sorry, you're just getting ridiculously boring now.

We had the vote back in 2016. Most evidence suggests that little has changed since that time, so there's no need to go back for your beloved 2nd/3rd/15th referendum. I'd be the first to agree with you if there had been an obvious, sizeable, shift since 2016 - there hasn't.

You're just sounding like an old record that got stuck in a groove. Despite your regular protests to the contrary, you come over as just like those Remainers who simply won't accept the decision, after a democratic vote.

If you are bored by my posts then I have an easy solution - don't reply to them.

Ironically, your post is far more repetitive and predictable than mine. Let me spell it out:

1. We voted to leave the EU in 2016. I have not forgotten
2. The Govt negotiated terms of withdrawal, as everybody expected.
3. You don't like them and you want to walk away without a deal. Something the leave campaign said would never happen.
4. The failure of the negotiations and the idea of leaving with no-deal is self evidently a significant change in circumstances. But you choose to ignore that and claim nothing has changed. Because it suits you.
5. You will support any argument that walking away with no-deal is mandated by the 2016 referendum, because it is what you want.
6. You don't know if your view is in the majority and you don't care.
7. You are against a second referendum because you are scared that no-deal will not be in the majority and you won't get what you want.

You don't care about democracy. If you did, you would have had no problem with my post. Instead, you resorted to the sort of tired, pointless rhetoric that is endlessly rolled out by people in your position. You suggested I simply could not accept the democratic vote.

It's pathetic.

Edited by Elysium on Sunday 19th May 20:31

You're actually beginning to sound rather panicky these days, so it may be that something is sinking in, at last.

However, you are quite right that I have the right to not reply to your posts - and, like others, will have great pleasure in so doing in future.

[andymadmak]

Elysium said:

If you are bored by my posts then I have an easy solution - don't reply to them.

Ironically, your post is far more repetitive and predictable than mine. Let me spell it out:

1. We voted to leave the EU in 2016. I have not forgotten

whilst you might not have forgotten, you certainly have not accepted that result.

Elysium said:

2. The Govt negotiated terms of withdrawal, as everybody expected.

As everybody expected? I think not. I certainly did not expect our government to be so duplicitous, to try to pass off as negotiation something which was so palpably an abject surrender and connivence in the strategy to Remain.
There has been precious little negotiation to leave. There has been much that was intended to frustrate the 2016 result .

Elysium said:

3. You don't like them and you want to walk away without a deal. Something the leave campaign said would never happen.

Show me the quote that said that the Leave campaign said no deal could never happen. Granted, it might not have been expected. But then again, the treachery of the retainers who negotiated the deal could not have been predicted.

Elysium said:

4. The failure of the negotiations and the idea of leaving with no-deal is self evidently a significant change in circumstances. But you choose to ignore that and claim nothing has changed. Because it suits you.

Have very convenient for you. Your Remain PM, aided by her Remain dominated cabinet and the odious Ollie Robbins sabotage the negotiations, and you point to that very sabotage as being justification for remaining. Despicable does not even begin to cover it.

Elysium said:

5. You will support any argument that walking away with no-deal is mandated by the 2016 referendum, because it is what you want.

Because no deal IS mandated by the 2016 referendum. You know this, because as a Remainer, you keep telling Brexiteers that they did not know what they were voting for in 2016. That lack of definition mandates any form of Brexit that meets all the promised criteria. (Mays deal does not)

Elysium said:

6. You don't know if your view is in the majority and you don't care.

Irrelevent.

Elysium said:

7. You are against a second referendum because you are scared that no-deal will not be in the majority and you won't get what you want.

I suspect he's against a second referendum because it's undemocratic. Your motives in support of one are as transparent as glass. Pathetic.

Elysium said:

You don't care about democracy. If you did, you would have had no problem with my post. Instead, you resorted to the sort of tired, pointless rhetoric that is endlessly rolled out by people in your position. You suggested I simply could not accept the democratic vote.

I suggest he cares more about democracy than you do. If you did care you would understand the serious issues involved in ignoring the 2016 result. But of course, for people like you, ignoring that result is justified because, well, getting what YOU want is more important than anything else. What you label as tired, pointless rhetoric is in fact the truth, a truth that you find inconvenient and uncomfortable. You're playing with fire and yet you don't begin to understand the consequences of what you are saying. Your arrogance is breath-taking. Te majority of those that voted simply do not agree with you. THAT's democracy.

Elysium said:

It's pathetic.

I agree. but not for the reasons you posted.

[don'tbesilly]

DeepEnd said:

Elysium said:

If you are bored by my posts then I have an easy solution - don't reply to them.

Ironically, your post is far more repetitive and predictable than mine. Let me spell it out:

1. We voted to leave the EU in 2016. I have not forgotten
2. The Govt negotiated terms of withdrawal, as everybody expected.
3. You don't like them and you want to walk away without a deal. Something the leave campaign said would never happen.
4. The failure of the negotiations and the desire for no deal is self evidently a significant change in circumstances. But you choose to inore it and claim nothing has changed. Because it suits you.
4. You will support any argument that walking away with no-deal is mandated by the 2016 referendum, because it is what you want.
5. You don't know if your view is in the majority and you don't care.
6. You are against a second referendum because you are scared that no-deal will not be in the majority and you won't get what you want.

You don't care about democracy. If you did, you would have had no problem with my post. Instead, you resorted to the sort of tired, pointless rhetoric that is endlessly rolled out by people in your position. You suggested I simply could not accept the democratic vote.

It's pathetic.

Agreed - I was going to type something similar.

The broken record / nothing has changed is apparent, but it is not the remain side who are stuck and out of ideas.

Voting for Farage who literally has no plan or policies is what is now being championed as what to do next.

Farage and the Brexit Party don't need any other policies other than the one clearly defined policy/plan it is going into the EU elections promising.

Based on media reports it would seem the BP has much bigger ambitions, one would hope that the bigger ambitions would bring about more and clearly defined policies, once the EU elections are done and dusted.

I expect the Tories/Labour will be getting the dusting.

[Tuna]

Elysium said:

Tuna said:

You're lamenting the current political situation. I'm suggesting that the attitudes you've championed on here are part of the problem.

It's not really a surprise that you don't see how it has any relevance to you. You have the moral high ground and you're against this kind of thing.

No. Still utterly and completely wrong.

You don't have the moral high ground and you're in favour of it?

[Elysium]

Tuna said:

Elysium said:

Tuna said:

You're lamenting the current political situation. I'm suggesting that the attitudes you've championed on here are part of the problem.

It's not really a surprise that you don't see how it has any relevance to you. You have the moral high ground and you're against this kind of thing.

No. Still utterly and completely wrong.

You don't have the moral high ground and you're in favour of it?

What on Earth are you on about?

[voyds9]

andymadmak said:

Lots.

+1

I voted to leave

I did not expect an argument about how to stay in and call it out.

I expected to sign an agreement to make our products EU compliant to sell them to the EU. As I expect to make anything I sell compliant to the country it ends up in.

Let's get out then start talks on a mutually beneficial deal

[Tuna]

Elysium said:

What on Earth are you on about?

I'm laughing at you. HTH

[Elysium]

andymadmak said:

Elysium said:

If you are bored by my posts then I have an easy solution - don't reply to them.

Ironically, your post is far more repetitive and predictable than mine. Let me spell it out:

1. We voted to leave the EU in 2016. I have not forgotten

whilst you might not have forgotten, you certainly have not accepted that result.

Elysium said:

2. The Govt negotiated terms of withdrawal, as everybody expected.

As everybody expected? I think not. I certainly did not expect our government to be so duplicitous, to try to pass off as negotiation something which was so palpably an abject surrender and connivence in the strategy to Remain.
There has been precious little negotiation to leave. There has been much that was intended to frustrate the 2016 result .

Elysium said:

3. You don't like them and you want to walk away without a deal. Something the leave campaign said would never happen.

Show me the quote that said that the Leave campaign said no deal could never happen. Granted, it might not have been expected. But then again, the treachery of the retainers who negotiated the deal could not have been predicted.

Elysium said:

4. The failure of the negotiations and the idea of leaving with no-deal is self evidently a significant change in circumstances. But you choose to ignore that and claim nothing has changed. Because it suits you.

Have very convenient for you. Your Remain PM, aided by her Remain dominated cabinet and the odious Ollie Robbins sabotage the negotiations, and you point to that very sabotage as being justification for remaining. Despicable does not even begin to cover it.

Elysium said:

5. You will support any argument that walking away with no-deal is mandated by the 2016 referendum, because it is what you want.

Because no deal IS mandated by the 2016 referendum. You know this, because as a Remainer, you keep telling Brexiteers that they did not know what they were voting for in 2016. That lack of definition mandates any form of Brexit that meets all the promised criteria. (Mays deal does not)

Elysium said:

6. You don't know if your view is in the majority and you don't care.

Irrelevent.

Elysium said:

7. You are against a second referendum because you are scared that no-deal will not be in the majority and you won't get what you want.

I suspect he's against a second referendum because it's undemocratic. Your motives in support of one are as transparent as glass. Pathetic.

Elysium said:

You don't care about democracy. If you did, you would have had no problem with my post. Instead, you resorted to the sort of tired, pointless rhetoric that is endlessly rolled out by people in your position. You suggested I simply could not accept the democratic vote.

I suggest he cares more about democracy than you do. If you did care you would understand the serious issues involved in ignoring the 2016 result. But of course, for people like you, ignoring that result is justified because, well, getting what YOU want is more important than anything else. What you label as tired, pointless rhetoric is in fact the truth, a truth that you find inconvenient and uncomfortable. You're playing with fire and yet you don't begin to understand the consequences of what you are saying. Your arrogance is breath-taking. Te majority of those that voted simply do not agree with you. THAT's democracy.

Elysium said:

It's pathetic.

I agree. but not for the reasons you posted.

Jesus wept. You are just making nonsense up.

Leave said in their referendum pamphlet that we would agree terms for our future relationship with the EU before we left.

It’s a matter of public record.

Edited by Elysium on Sunday 19th May 22:47

[Garvin]

Elysium said:

Jesus wept. You are just making nonsense up.

Bugger. That’s another irony meter just exploded,

[Elysium]

Garvin said:

Elysium said:

Jesus wept. You are just making nonsense up.

Bugger. That’s another irony meter just exploded,

Come on then - what have I made up?

[Garvin]

Elysium said:

Come on then - what have I made up?

It would take a (very) long time to list all your nonsense but just go back to posts at 10:31 and 10:40 am today and you will see one example of the bks you spout!

[Elysium]

Garvin said:

Elysium said:

Come on then - what have I made up?

It would take a (very) long time to list all your nonsense but just go back to posts at 10:31 and 10:40 am today and you will see one example of the bks you spout!

I asked what I had made up?

The answer is nothing. The post you mentioned is an example of you failing to read the thread.

Edited by Elysium on Sunday 19th May 23:10

[Elysium]

Garvin said:

Elysium said:

So corruption is OK if the penalities are low?

I have not seen anyone here who claims this so why have you stated this? The EU rules are clear and, unfortunately, are not severe enough on this sort of thing, but that is the EU ‘gravy train’ way.

In the UK it is pretty difficult to get rid of misbehaving MPs - just look how long it took to get rid of the Peterborough MP who was convicted of a criminal offence. However, at least it was possible via the recall petition.

This was a question .... aimed at a poster who appeared to have this view.

[Garvin]

Elysium said:

Garvin said:

Elysium said:

Come on then - what have I made up?

It would take a (very) long time to list all your nonsense but just go back to posts at 10:31 and 10:40 am today and you will see one example of the bks you spout!

I asked what I had made up?

The answer is nothing. The post you mentioned is an example of you failing to read the thread.

You are truly Monty Python’s Black Knight AICMFP

[wisbech]

voyds9 said:

+1

I voted to leave

I did not expect an argument about how to stay in and call it out.

I expected to sign an agreement to make our products EU compliant to sell them to the EU. As I expect to make anything I sell compliant to the country it ends up in.

Let's get out then start talks on a mutually beneficial deal

Why is an agreement needed? You make stuff compliant with US/EU/Japan standards as needed, pay for certification. Goods might get inspected/ tested by other end.