I saw nothing wrong with that. That was a great trade! If the government wasn't messing around trying to maintain the pound at unsustainable levels it would never have happened
TRUE ENOUGH -- SO THEY DESERVED EACH OTHER -- LOL
Brexit
- Thread starter britbox
- Start date
TRUE ENOUGH -- SO THEY DESERVED EACH OTHER -- LOL
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,392
- Reactions
- 5,466
- Points
- 113
A bit naughty but thought this was interesting...
Donald Trump is a disaster for Brexit
Britain cannot look to the US for support after its divorce from the EU
Gideon Rachman
by: Gideon Rachman
For the most ardent supporters of Brexit, the election of Donald Trump was a mixture of vindication and salvation. The president of the US, no less, thinks it is a great idea for Britain to leave the EU. Even better, he seems to offer an exciting escape route. The UK can leap off the rotting raft of the EU and on to the gleaming battleship HMS Anglosphere.
It is an alluring vision. Unfortunately, it is precisely wrong. The election of Mr Trump has transformed Brexit from a risky decision into a straightforward disaster. For the past 40 years, Britain has had two central pillars to its foreign policy: membership of the EU and a “special relationship†with the US.
The decision to exit the EU leaves Britain much more dependent on the US, just at a time when America has elected an unstable president opposed to most of the central propositions on which UK foreign policy is based.
During the brief trip to Washington by Theresa May, the UK prime minister, this unpleasant truth was partly obscured by trivia and trade. Mr Trump’s decision to return the bust of Winston Churchill to the Oval Office was greeted with slavish delight by Brexiters. More substantively, the Trump administration made it clear that it is minded to do a trade deal with the UK just as soon as Britain’s EU divorce comes through.
But no sooner had Mrs May left Washington than Mr Trump caused uproar with his “Muslim banâ€, affecting immigrants and refugees from seven countries. After equivocating briefly, the prime minister was forced to distance herself from her new best friend in the White House.
Related article
May finds goodwill from Trump visit draining away
White House wrongfooted Britain’s PM within hours of first meeting’s success
The refugee row underlined the extent to which Mrs May and Mr Trump have clashing visions of the world. Even when it comes to trade, the supposed basis for their new special relationship, the two leaders have very different views.
Mrs May says that she wants the UK to be the champion of global free trade. But Mr Trump is the most protectionist US president since the 1930s. This is a stark clash of visions that will be much harder to gloss over — if and when Mr Trump begins slapping tariffs on foreign goods and ignoring the World Trade Organisation.
In addition, any trade deal with the Trump administration is likely to be hard to swallow for Britain and would involve controversial concessions on the National Health Service and agriculture.
The British and American leaders also have profoundly different attitudes to international organisations. Mrs May is a firm believer in the importance of Nato and the United Nations. (Britain’s permanent membership of the UN Security Council is one of its few remaining totems of great power status). But Mr Trump has twice called Nato obsolete and is threatening to slash US funding of the UN.
The May and Trump administrations are also at odds on the crucial questions of the future of the EU and of Russia. Mr Trump is openly contemptuous of the EU and his aides have speculated that it might break up. This reflects the views of Nigel Farage and the UK Independence party — but not of the current British government.
Mrs May knows that her difficult negotiations with the EU will become all-but-impossible if member states believe that the UK is actively working to destroy their organisation in alliance with Mr Trump.
Her official position is that Britain wants to work with a strong EU. She probably even means it, given the economic and political dangers that would flow from its break-up.
Not the least of these dangers would be an increased threat from a resurgent Russia. The British government worked closely with the Obama administration to impose economic sanctions on the country after its annexation of Crimea. But Mr Trump is already flirting with lifting sanctions.
The reality is that the UK is now faced with a US president who is fundamentally at odds with the British view of the world. For all the forced smiles in the Oval Office last week, the May government certainly knows this. For political reasons, Boris Johnson, the British foreign minister, is having to talk up the prospects of a trade deal with Mr Trump.
Yet only a few months ago, Mr Johnson was saying that Mr Trump was “clearly out of his mind†and betrayed a “stupefying ignorance†of the world.
Were it not for Brexit — a cause that Mr Johnson enthusiastically championed — the UK government would be able to take an appropriately wary approach to Mr Trump. If Britain had voted to stay inside the EU, the obvious response to the arrival of a pro-Russia protectionist in the Oval Office would be to draw closer to its European allies.
Britain could defend free-trade far more effectively with the EU’s bulk behind it — and could also start to explore the possibilities for more EU defence co-operation. As it is, Britain has been thrown into the arms of an American president that the UK’s foreign secretary has called a madman.
In the declining years of the British empire, some of its politicians flattered themselves that they could be “Greeks to their Romans†— providing wise and experienced counsel to the new American imperium.
But the Emperor Nero has now taken power in Washington — and the British are having to smile and clap as he sets fires and reaches for his fiddle.
Donald Trump is a disaster for Brexit
Britain cannot look to the US for support after its divorce from the EU
Gideon Rachman
by: Gideon Rachman
For the most ardent supporters of Brexit, the election of Donald Trump was a mixture of vindication and salvation. The president of the US, no less, thinks it is a great idea for Britain to leave the EU. Even better, he seems to offer an exciting escape route. The UK can leap off the rotting raft of the EU and on to the gleaming battleship HMS Anglosphere.
It is an alluring vision. Unfortunately, it is precisely wrong. The election of Mr Trump has transformed Brexit from a risky decision into a straightforward disaster. For the past 40 years, Britain has had two central pillars to its foreign policy: membership of the EU and a “special relationship†with the US.
The decision to exit the EU leaves Britain much more dependent on the US, just at a time when America has elected an unstable president opposed to most of the central propositions on which UK foreign policy is based.
During the brief trip to Washington by Theresa May, the UK prime minister, this unpleasant truth was partly obscured by trivia and trade. Mr Trump’s decision to return the bust of Winston Churchill to the Oval Office was greeted with slavish delight by Brexiters. More substantively, the Trump administration made it clear that it is minded to do a trade deal with the UK just as soon as Britain’s EU divorce comes through.
But no sooner had Mrs May left Washington than Mr Trump caused uproar with his “Muslim banâ€, affecting immigrants and refugees from seven countries. After equivocating briefly, the prime minister was forced to distance herself from her new best friend in the White House.
Related article
May finds goodwill from Trump visit draining away
White House wrongfooted Britain’s PM within hours of first meeting’s success
The refugee row underlined the extent to which Mrs May and Mr Trump have clashing visions of the world. Even when it comes to trade, the supposed basis for their new special relationship, the two leaders have very different views.
Mrs May says that she wants the UK to be the champion of global free trade. But Mr Trump is the most protectionist US president since the 1930s. This is a stark clash of visions that will be much harder to gloss over — if and when Mr Trump begins slapping tariffs on foreign goods and ignoring the World Trade Organisation.
In addition, any trade deal with the Trump administration is likely to be hard to swallow for Britain and would involve controversial concessions on the National Health Service and agriculture.
The British and American leaders also have profoundly different attitudes to international organisations. Mrs May is a firm believer in the importance of Nato and the United Nations. (Britain’s permanent membership of the UN Security Council is one of its few remaining totems of great power status). But Mr Trump has twice called Nato obsolete and is threatening to slash US funding of the UN.
The May and Trump administrations are also at odds on the crucial questions of the future of the EU and of Russia. Mr Trump is openly contemptuous of the EU and his aides have speculated that it might break up. This reflects the views of Nigel Farage and the UK Independence party — but not of the current British government.
Mrs May knows that her difficult negotiations with the EU will become all-but-impossible if member states believe that the UK is actively working to destroy their organisation in alliance with Mr Trump.
Her official position is that Britain wants to work with a strong EU. She probably even means it, given the economic and political dangers that would flow from its break-up.
Not the least of these dangers would be an increased threat from a resurgent Russia. The British government worked closely with the Obama administration to impose economic sanctions on the country after its annexation of Crimea. But Mr Trump is already flirting with lifting sanctions.
The reality is that the UK is now faced with a US president who is fundamentally at odds with the British view of the world. For all the forced smiles in the Oval Office last week, the May government certainly knows this. For political reasons, Boris Johnson, the British foreign minister, is having to talk up the prospects of a trade deal with Mr Trump.
Yet only a few months ago, Mr Johnson was saying that Mr Trump was “clearly out of his mind†and betrayed a “stupefying ignorance†of the world.
Were it not for Brexit — a cause that Mr Johnson enthusiastically championed — the UK government would be able to take an appropriately wary approach to Mr Trump. If Britain had voted to stay inside the EU, the obvious response to the arrival of a pro-Russia protectionist in the Oval Office would be to draw closer to its European allies.
Britain could defend free-trade far more effectively with the EU’s bulk behind it — and could also start to explore the possibilities for more EU defence co-operation. As it is, Britain has been thrown into the arms of an American president that the UK’s foreign secretary has called a madman.
In the declining years of the British empire, some of its politicians flattered themselves that they could be “Greeks to their Romans†— providing wise and experienced counsel to the new American imperium.
But the Emperor Nero has now taken power in Washington — and the British are having to smile and clap as he sets fires and reaches for his fiddle.
So, Tony Blair stands up to announce that halting Brexit is his new role in life.
He's probably got the lowest credibility in UK Politics.
He's probably got the lowest credibility in UK Politics.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,392
- Reactions
- 5,466
- Points
- 113
Thought this was funny....
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/polit...-brexiters-shitting-themselves-20170321124592
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/polit...-brexiters-shitting-themselves-20170321124592
Yep, it begins. 10 years down the track you'll likely have a different opinion, but there was always going to economic hurt at the beginning.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,392
- Reactions
- 5,466
- Points
- 113
10 years down the track, I hope I would have sold my company for a disgusting amount of money and moved to warmer climes
Can the Brexit mean new life to British steel and those vegetating industrial cities in the UK? Especially with the new global trend, if we can call Trump's coal love a trend?
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,392
- Reactions
- 5,466
- Points
- 113
I don't think heavy industry will return to the UK in my lifetime. Exports generally should improve though in the short term.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,392
- Reactions
- 5,466
- Points
- 113
The infrastructure still exists. Steel is still being produced. It's just a case for ramping it up, if sterling allows. I agree, I don't think it happens because based on comparative advantage it makes more sense to do that stuff in India, but... if it's a decision to ramp up in the UK vs somewhere in mainland Europe then there might be a case to be made
HomeOp-EdgeLike the lyrics to "The Clash".... "Should I stay or should I go now?"
Should the UK exit the EU or should it stay?
Any thoughts @Federberg @Jammymich @danbrusca @JesuslookslikeBorg @Glenys -@Rides if you are interested of course
Other opinions welcomed, just I know these are fellow brits.
EU starts playing hardball over Brexit, takes UK to task over 'people, money & Ireland'
John Lee is the political editor and columnist at the Mail on Sunday (Ireland edition). He has covered Irish, British, US, European and Australian politics for over 20 years for a number of titles, including the Sunday Times and the Daily Telegraph (Australia). He lives in Dublin, Ireland with his wife Lorraine, who is a politician, and his daughter Kitty.
Published time: 1 May, 2017 13:15Edited time: 1 May, 2017 21:28
Get short URL
© Peter Nicholls / Reuters
mocked the food on offer at number 10 Downing Street.
Twenty-seven EU leaders met in Brussels to give the EU’s official statement of its terms for the negotiation of British departure from the Union. At the same time, May was campaigning at home for a General Election to be held on June 8.
The European Council (Article 50) guidelines for Brexit negotiations were published on the weekend after the briefest summit in my memory. I’ve been to many of these Summits. They are invariably filled with bad coffee and processed food as we wait around the sterile Berlaymont EU Parliament Building until the early hours. Behind closed doors EU leaders argue over minutiae endlessly. On Saturday, however, the meeting took just four minutes to agree the text. The message was unity, unity of action by 27 nations against Britain.
Follow
Donald Tusk ✔@eucopresident
Guidelines adopted unanimously. EU27 firm and fair political mandate for the #Brexit talks is ready. #EUCO
7:26 AM - 29 Apr 2017
- https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?in_reply_to=858281339568758784
1,0971,097 Retweets
1,2841,284 likes
The document spoke, predictably, of the disruption the British have caused by deciding to leave. Dripping with an odd blend of arrogance and self-pity, it says that the United Kingdom's decision to leave the Union creates “significant uncertainties†that have the potential to “cause disruptionâ€.
There was also pity expressed for the British, for their democratic decision will cause disruption “in particular in the United Kingdomâ€.
European Council President Donald Tusk summarized the EU negotiation document by saying the British Government must settle the issues of “people, money and Ireland†before negotiating trade.
View image on Twitter
Follow
PoliticsHome ✔@politicshome
Donald Tusk: UK must settle ‘people, money and Ireland’ first in Brexit talks http://bit.ly/2pFLXVR
1:15 PM - 28 Apr 2017
This was a weekend of new departures for the EU: along with quick meetings and easy to understand documents, we had Tusk throwing out usefully succinct sentences. For it wonderfully summarizes the British predicament. They must decide people, money and Ireland before they get to trade. And anyone with a passing understanding of British history knows that it is only trade that really matters to the British. The largest Empire the world has seen was founded, by a small maritime nation, to conduct trade. The possession of those lands it sought to trade with - India, America and Hong Kong - followed almost as an afterthought. That order has now been flipped on the British.
Tusk was saying that the UK must ensure the welfare of the more than 3 million EU citizens within its borders. That concern had not been flagged before the weekend. That could potentially see these people with access to the European Court of Justice while British citizens proper don’t. Britain must also honor its financial obligations to the union, including a “divorce bill†of up to €60 billion. And then comes Ireland. Those overseas possessions, since World War I, an albatross around the necks of the British, are going to cause untold grief. The EU has cunningly dropped in explosive references to Ireland and the tiny rock of Gibraltar. Two of the smallest pawns in the Union are being brought to play.
Little old Ireland has the only land border with the UK in the EU. Ireland was partitioned after winning independence from Britain in 1921; six northern counties remain within the UK. The document simply says that the Good Friday Agreement that brought peace to decades of conflict in Northern Ireland in 1998 must be adhered to. And ‘imaginative’ solutions must be introduced to avoid a ‘hard’ border, which would restrict the movement of people and goods.
Yet, explosively, it was announced afterwards that minutes of negotiations which will be published in June will refer to something far more problematic. The EU mandarins announced that if, in the future, the people of Ireland vote for a United Ireland all the people will avail of the rights of EU citizens.
Follow
Enda Kenny ✔@EndaKennyTD
EU Council is just over and we have achieved a strong result for Ireland.
1:32 PM - 29 Apr 2017
Irish officials in Brussels told me they were "ecstatic" with the diplomatic coup that has seen them secure a mention of a United Ireland. British diplomats, on the other hand, told me they are furious. This is interfering with the British union.
The document also says that Spain will have a full veto over the future of Gibraltar. The small island, really a large rock, off the south coast of Spain has been occupied by Britain since 1713. It’s status is disputed by Spain. British governments have had no great love for these territories; they cost them billions and are really an anachronism. But by giving Ireland and Gibraltar such prominence, the EU has thrown a couple of grenades into the debate.
The majority of voters in Northern Ireland voted to stay in the EU in last June’s Brexit vote. This offer by the EU will play on their minds in the General Election. If pro Remain parties gain a large majority in Northern Ireland and in Scotland, the viability of the ‘United Kingdom’ is further undermined.
That Gibraltar has ended up in the official EU communiqué is a cunning move too. It hits psychologically at the British, at their power and their ability to protect their citizens in the last bastions of Empire. The Tory heartland will not be happy.
Bringing up these issues demonstrates that Juncker, Tusk and German Chancellor Angela Merkel are willing to play hardball, and this damages May going into the election. I have been one of those who does not predict a good election for May. I think the Labour heartlands in the north, allied with anti-Brexit sentiment in London, might deal her a blow she is not expecting. The polls are turning too in Labour’s favor.
If you like Machiavelli, you will have admired the performance of the EU establishment over this last week. And as always the real action in the diplomatic negotiations happened over dinner. Last Wednesday in Chequers, the Prime Minister’s country retreat, May met with Jean Claude Juncker and other EU leaders.
Journalists were briefed that Juncker dramatically pulled out a copy of the 2,000-page EU-Canada trade deal. He reminded her that the recently agreed deal had taken almost a decade to negotiate.
Juncker reportedly told Angela Merkel that Theresa May is “deludedâ€.
A British Government source told me: “The message was clear – ‘you are not getting out of this dysfunctional relationship quickly or easily’. This could ruin youâ€.
Numerous briefings in Brussels were along the same lines. The British PM was “unrealistic†and “living in cloud cuckoo landâ€.
The Irish, Greeks and Portuguese have seen this in the past. I wrote a book chronicling the Irish financial crash. The memories Irish leaders have of the treatment they received from President of the European Central Bank will never leave them. Another Jean Claude, Jean Claude Trichet used similar tactics to the current Jean Claude. Slap down your opponent, make it clear that the opponent is just not as smart as all those wonderfully sophisticated French and German bureaucrats.
And that’s what is happening again. The rights of Ireland and Gibraltar are being heralded, but nobody really cares about them. This is about protecting the rights of Germany and France to do as well as possible out of the EU. And to enshrine the salaries and cushy conditions of the tens of thousands of Brussels-based bureaucrats. The very interests the British have most vocally criticized.
May is getting a taste of EU steel. But she is weak, she only wants to get out. But to do that she has to deal with the EU and play by its rules. Or, as Juncker so unsubtly hinted, this break up could take many years.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
tony blair should just get over HIMSELF! he is sooooooo DONE! LOL.
just accept it-- more brits PEOPLE want OUT of brussels-unelected technocrat vampires-ruled ''EU'' . END OF STORY. LET the PEOPLE of UK Decide for themselves what they want and what they need and regain their sovereignty!
David Davis reports back from Brexit negotiations:
Like DD's jib, pragmatic and sensible and debates the points.
Like DD's jib, pragmatic and sensible and debates the points.
So I was talking to the folks back in the UK over the weekend... my sister, her hubby and kids are big remainers, the old fella is a big Brexiteer... cousins generally split... wife's family generally split but probably more Brexit, but one thing is for sure is that all assess it as a giant fucking mess.
So IMO, this isn't Brexit as voted... there was no hard/soft Brexit on the ballot - that's a retrospective interpretation by remainers and the establishment... Brexit was leave the EU and the customs union. I understand the views of Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Farage and others... and why they feel totally betrayed. I would have voted leave but chose not to vote at all because it doesn't affect me.
However, contrary to some of the discussions on here, I was never a hard Brexiteer - if Cameron had come back from the EU with some of the concessions in the current deal I probably would have voted for remain. He didn't. There was never the need for a referendum if they EU had not been so damn arrogant and paid attention to real localised issues.
Now the bigger issue is that this giant mess may well provide a means to power for the Marxist Corbynistas. Kind of laughable, considering Corbyn is anti-EU at heart.
So IMO, this isn't Brexit as voted... there was no hard/soft Brexit on the ballot - that's a retrospective interpretation by remainers and the establishment... Brexit was leave the EU and the customs union. I understand the views of Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Farage and others... and why they feel totally betrayed. I would have voted leave but chose not to vote at all because it doesn't affect me.
However, contrary to some of the discussions on here, I was never a hard Brexiteer - if Cameron had come back from the EU with some of the concessions in the current deal I probably would have voted for remain. He didn't. There was never the need for a referendum if they EU had not been so damn arrogant and paid attention to real localised issues.
Now the bigger issue is that this giant mess may well provide a means to power for the Marxist Corbynistas. Kind of laughable, considering Corbyn is anti-EU at heart.