shurlock

We have far greater clarity than before pal, even if it’s only been by a process of elimination. Whether it’s May’s deal or another deal, it’s absolutely clear it cannot and will not deliver on the fantasies of Leave. FACT. Not sure which planet you’re on. But do you think the majority of remainers support Chequers. Where did I say there was a parliamentary majority for it? Read instead of frothing.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/operation-no-deal-army-plans-for-troops-on-street-cc5c55kq8 Maybe the army has seen some of the threats of violence on this thread.

No Les it would depend on how much new information had come to light or circumstances had changed in that intervening period. The fact is that we now have clarity where before we had vague, undeliverable promises if not outright lies pal. That’s hardly surprising given article 50 had not been even triggered in June 2016 and it was only three days ago we found out what leave actually meant Just to remind you -outside your putrid echo chamber of swivels- there is no parliamentary support for no deal. Per Alistair Burt, the extremists better play their hand carefullly or all bets are off and you may end up with a lot of egg on your faces.

51.9%

Is he talking about Brexit Jamie?

Thankfully its all fibre optic broadband where I live.

EU Empire? Don’t make me laugh pal. I suspect you never read the Balance of Competences Review, the most comprehensive assessment ever undertaken of what the EU does and how it affects a member state UK. Spoiler: there is no EU Empire. If you read the review, you’ll also realise that the UK has wielded considerable influence over the direction of the EU. That’s a feature of its large vote share and ability to persuade others. It has been pivotal to the development of single market and other key decisions such as EU enlargement. A company like Vodafone which is held up as a buccaneering example of Global Britain owes its success significantly to favourable EU telecommunications regulation which gave it a chance to scale up from a national provider. In other words, pooling sovereignty has amplified UK power – that privileged position has also made the UK a more valuable ally to countries like the US. The UK doesn’t get its way all the time; it often has to compromise as do France and Germany. But that’s not the behaviour of an empire. And in the most sensitive policy areas the UK retains a veto and/or obtained numerous opt-outs. Needless to say the EU has zero right to act in numerous policy areas: health policy, education, fiscal and monetary policy, income tax, corporation tax and capital gains, pensions, welfare, foreign policy, local government, policing and criminal justice, border control and security, media regulation, non-EU immigration etc. The UK controls more than 98 per cent of its public expenditure which it can spend more or less how it likes. To trade -indeed any form of cooperation- is to accept limits on your autonomy and sovereignty. That's an inescapable fact of life unless you choose to withdraw from the world. Extreme Brexiteers are set for a rude awakening when they discover the sheer lack of sentimentality in negotiations with China and the US. At least within the EU, the UK has enjoyed both internal clout and the external influence that has come with being a member of the world’s second-largest economy. One marvels at the sheer naivety of Brexiteers. Reality has p*ssed all over your claims; alas you don't appear any closer to acknowledging that.

The EU's position has been clear from day one pal. The outcome was always going to be like this, regardless whether the country was divided or united. I can't help if the grooming gangs of the swivel-eyed right have led you into thinking that the UK held all the cards and that any deal could deliver the exact same benefits as EU membership - all while indulging your dark, paranoid fantasies about the Germans and French. FWIW, I don't currently support a people's vote - I've had arguments with prominent Remainers on this. While the 2016 referendum campaign and result fuelled a lamentable amount of bitterness and resentment, all that would come to resemble the proverbial vicar’s tea party if a second referendum was held. You only need to look at the frenzied state of posters like Wes Tender, Guided Missile and Lord Duckhunter.

Is deontological fundamentalist more up your alley pal?

Or quite simply Fox knows it’s not a very good/bad deal but ultimately realises, in a rare outbreak of pragmatism, that the alternative is far worse.

He’s a deluded ideologue - thankfully Parliament won’t let the country crash out on WTO terms.

This is getting quite painful for you Les. If any kind of deal is better than no deal -and Fox in no way qualified, defined, modified or limited what he meant by deal, then it follows that a bad deal is also better than no deal. A deal is a deal - whether it’s good, bad or any other description under the sun. If you still have questions, my dog is happy to sit down and explain how adjectives work to you. And, of course, the bigger point is that Fox, one of your supposed comrades in arms, is endorsing the same deal that is causing jihadists like you to froth in anger. Watching that nasty little c**t Steve Baker get triggered is almost as amusing as watching you flounder

Harry and glenn?

Or a fresh, chewy bagel.

Getting hot under the collar that not all swivels share your zeal Les By definition, a deal can be a good or bad deal -its not specified- so no it doesn't support your point.

Sh*ts and g*ggles.

I think a people’s vote is much closer today than it was last week. What’s clear is that there is zero parliamentary majority for a hard Brexit. The swivels can rejoin the Conservative party all they like in the hope of a leadership contest. It isn’t going to make a damned difference.

Liam Fox: ' ......ultimately I hope that across parliament we will recognise that a deal is better than no deal'. I had to read that twice just in case

I dont know why May didn't call up a failed local businessman to lead negotiations. The trade deficit argument is and has always been a zombie idea: UK exports to the EU are three times more important to the UK’s economy than vice versa (7.5% of GDP vs. 2.5%). The EU holds the cards. If it was a credible argument or a point of leverage, don't worry little fella it would have been used

Yes exactly pal. That's why its a distant, if not abstract aspiration and the little kippers are needlessly wetting their union jack panties. EU countries could start by getting joint procurement in order.

I know pal. Trading on WTO term is more complicated than Brexiteers claim.

That’s an understatement

A bit more complicated than that pal. Your mate Trump has called NATO obsolete. Never mind the current US administration has led to uncertainty about its engagement and commitment in the world or that it’s positon on a number of issues is at odds with Europe and the UK or that there are security issues such as migration crisis which are local in nature. Even NATO leaders have called on Europe to grow up and be willing to provide all the capabilities to handle a regional crisis without American engagement if the US does not wish to engage.

I'm not worrying. Can't say the same about others on here, though

Reading the experts on this thread, you’d think that the UK had joined the Euro and Schengen given Brussels is all-powerful and national sovereignty is just a fig-leaf (forget the fundamental principles of subsidiarity and unanimity in the most sensitive areas). But no if the UK remained in the EU, it would be strong-armed into an EU army under the Fourth Reich. The state of this place sometimes