Brexit - Post Match Reaction

 

No complaints as yet Balders. This line of work can involve a lot of waiting, followed by manic spells -not to mention I have the opportunity to work through the night and on weekends.

I guess the canned dog food industry is a 24 hour operation. Mind you, if you get caught, you could always claim that your efforts tie in with their marketing and brand building strategy. Even though I haven't got a dog, if I did get one, I would probably buy Pal (thanks to you) :lol::lol:

 

No complaints as yet Balders. This line of work can involve a lot of waiting, followed by manic spells -not to mention I have the opportunity to work through the night and on weekends.

A manic episode is not a disorder in and of itself, but rather is diagnosed as a part of a condition called bipolar disorder. A manic episode is a mood state characterized by period of at least one week where an elevated, expansive or unusually irritable mood exists.

All now becomes clear.

I guess the canned dog food industry is a 24 hour operation. Mind you, if you get caught, you could always claim that your efforts tie in with their marketing and brand building strategy. Even though I haven't got a dog, if I did get one, I would probably buy Pal (thanks to you) :lol::lol:

#anothersatisfiedcustomer

I'd be pretty ****ed off if I found out that one of my consultants spent most of his day on a football forum... just saying

In the meantime, let's all brighten the good mood of recent events still further, by having a good belly laugh at Mr Juncker's expense.

Here is the measure of the tinpot clown he has become, an embarrassment to the EU and good enough reason on its own for departing from an organisation run by the likes of him.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/watch-jean-claude-juncker-threatens-promote-break-usa/

https://order-order.com/2017/03/30/polish-mp-complains-jean-claude-druncker/

I guess the canned dog food industry is a 24 hour operation. Mind you, if you get caught, you could always claim that your efforts tie in with their marketing and brand building strategy. Even though I haven't got a dog, if I did get one, I would probably buy Pal (thanks to you) :lol::lol:

In the meantime, let's all brighten the good mood of recent events still further, by having a good belly laugh at Mr Juncker's expense.

 

Here is the measure of the tinpot clown he has become, an embarrassment to the EU and good enough reason on its own for departing from an organisation run by the likes of him.

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/watch-jean-claude-juncker-threatens-promote-break-usa/

https://order-order.com/2017/03/30/polish-mp-complains-jean-claude-druncker/

I'm a remainer but even I think Juncker is a bellend. Mind you, I think the first story is fair enough - California first and I can get back to LA .

Back on planet earth, reality beginning to dawn. Like it or not, the EU has been completely consistent.

 

EU leaders are preparing a tough opening stance in Brexit talks, explicitly stating that Britain must accept the bloc’s existing laws, court, and budget fees if it seeks a gradual transition out of the single market.

 

Draft European Council guidelines, which the EU27 leaders aim to adopt at a summit next month, lay down a flinty political response to Theresa May that prioritises withdrawal terms and the integrity of its founding principles rather than future UK relations.

 

A copy obtained by the Financial Times lays out the EU’s hopes of an ambitious future partnership with Britain, but it insists on a “phased approach” to negotiations. This requires Britain to make “sufficient progress” on withdrawal before EU leaders will initiate talks on future relations.

 

Most worrying for London, the draft unambiguously spells out conditions for a transition phase, which would minimise disruption until a trade deal is complete. If the EU’s single market legal “acquis” — its body of common rights and obligations — is prolonged at all after Brexit, the guidelines say it requires “existing regulatory, budgetary, supervisory, and enforcement instruments and structures to apply”.

 

While the precise drafting will be hotly debated by EU diplomats in coming weeks, the principles are supported by Paris, Berlin and other major capitals, according to several senior sources involved in preparations.

 

Diplomats say there is as much chance of tighter conditions being added as of the text being watered down. The draft leaves undefined, for instance, what “sufficient progress” entails on citizen rights or Britain’s financial liabilities.

 

Once adopted, the European Commission will propose a negotiating mandate for talks. This will be a more detailed working document framing the priorities and objectives of Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator.

 

The draft guidelines offer an unvarnished view of the consequences of Brexit. They bluntly state that Britain’s departure from the single market and customs union will involve disruption for the economy and citizens as new legal barriers are enforced.

 

Six core principles are set for the negotiations, covering both the withdrawal and transition phases.

 

It calls for a “balance” of rights and obligations; the “autonomy” of the EU rulemaking and “legal order”; the indivisibility of the EU’s four freedoms, including the free movement of labour; and the integrity of the single market.

 

“A non-member of the union, that does not live up to the same obligations as a member, cannot have the same rights and enjoy the same benefits as a member,” it states. “In this context, the European Council welcomes the recognition by the British government that the four freedoms of the Single Market are indivisible and that there can be no “cherry picking”.

 

In another move that will raise concern in Westminster, it calls for a level playing field in future economic relations with the UK, mentioning competition, subsidy controls and provisions against fiscal dumping — a demand in direct response to British threats on tax.

 

A substantial section of the document is devoted to ways to minimise uncertainty for citizens and businesses at the point of withdrawal. The draft suggests EU citizen rights would only end at the point of Brexit, not at the date of notification, as some Brexiters have suggested.

 

A short section also calls on the UK to honour its share of the EU’s financial commitments. It calls on Britain to “respect the obligations undertaken before the date of withdrawal”. “The settlement should cover all legal and budgetary commitments as well as liabilities, including contingent liabilities,” it states. The Commission estimates this to be about €60bn.

 

Finally the EU statement makes clear that it wants an agreement, because a no-deal scenario would be damaging to all sides. It says the EU-27 will nevertheless prepare for an unmanaged exit with no agreement. “

 

Any free-trade agreement should be balanced, ambitious and wide-ranging. It cannot, however, amount to participation in the Single Market or parts thereof, as this would undermine its integrity and proper functioning,” the guidelines state. “It must ensure a level playing field in terms of competition and state aid, and must encompass safeguards against unfair competitive advantages through, inter alia, fiscal social and environmental dumping.”

 

The guidelines are the main political vehicle for the EU’s 27 national leaders to control the Brexit negotiation process. Mr Barnier’s mandate is expected to cover only withdrawal issues; both the EU guidelines and his mandate will be updated through the Brexit process.

 

However, the EU is making clear that no trade deal can formally be completed with Britain under the Article 50 withdrawal process. That will require a separate mandate for a trade negotiation, agreed on a different legal basis. This would only be done once Britain has left the union, according to the guidelines.

 

The draft says that EU member state “stand ready to engage in preliminary and preparatory discussions” about a future relationship “as soon as sufficient progress has been made in the first phase towards reaching a satisfactory agreement on the arrangements for an orderly withdrawal.”

 

The guidelines say the EU is open to discussing a transition or “bridge” to any trade deal, but under strict conditions.

 

“Any such transitional arrangements must be clearly defined, limited in time, and subject to effective enforcement mechanisms,” it states. “Should a time-limited prolongation of union acquis be considered, this would require existing Union regulatory, budgetary, supervisory and enforcement instruments and structures to apply.”

 

“In many ways this is an absurd exercise,” said one senior EU official involved in the process. “It is a tragedy where we have to play our role . . . reinventing things that we already have because [the British] cannot live with them.”

 

 

Did I mention you? You're the one who mentioned the decline of British operators.

Sorry, I was replying to Tim before his edit.

Sorry, I was replying to Tim before his edit.

Whether it is you personally or others, the point still stands. you said British companies have been failing to compete with EU rivals despite having the same financial support as them. How is that situation going to improve post Brexit when they no longer have access to that same support?

I think this article may be useful to those that are interested.

In particular:

As the UK has tended to give less state aid than other member states, state aid rules typically assist UK businesses, by controlling illegal aid to competitors in other member states and requiring illegal aid to be repaid.

and:

I think this article may be useful to those that are interested.

 

In particular:

 

 

 

and:

 

What's your point, Trident.

"UK has tended to give less state aid than other member states" - that's a matter of political choice.

In Trident world, the free trade, shrink-the-state kippers will be chomping at the bit for higher levels of state funding

Siemens during referendum: Brexit would make us reconsider future investment

Siemens now: No reason not to invest!

Siemens during referendum: Brexit would make us reconsider future investment

 

Siemens now: No reason not to invest!

It might help if you're faithful to what the Siemans CEO said - not just cherry pick parts of his interview.

When you cook a dish, you follow all of the recipe. You don't leave out ingredients or instructions, do you Jamie.

http://news.sky.com/story/siemens-boss-my-confidence-in-britains-future-after-brexit-10818704

I guess the canned dog food industry is a 24 hour operation. Mind you, if you get caught, you could always claim that your efforts tie in with their marketing and brand building strategy. Even though I haven't got a dog, if I did get one, I would probably buy Pal (thanks to you) :lol::lol:

I have to admit this did make me chuckle

Siemens during referendum: Brexit would make us reconsider future investment

 

Siemens now: No reason not to invest!

You're quite right, despite the attempt from Shatlock to deflect from what they said during the referendum campaign by references to fruit picking and culinary practices.

Here is the original actual link from Siemens pre-referendum that Remoaners like him gleefully quoted as part of project fear.

https://www.siemens.co.uk/en/news_press/press_releases/britain_in_eu_statement_from_siemens_plc.htm

Siemens believes that being part of the EU is good for UK jobs and prosperity and we have concerns about the possible effects of a vote to leave.

In addition to the benefits of EU membership, we have concerns about what Brexit could mean in practice. Most commentators agree that a Brexit would disrupt the economy in the short-term and we believe that uncertainty about the UK’s future relationship with the EU could have more significant and negative long-term effects. In particular, a new trade deal with the EU could take many years to conclude and it is impossible to predict the terms that will be agreed and at what price. This uncertainty, and threat of increased costs, could make the UK a less attractive place to do business and may become a factor when Siemens is considering future investment here.

 

Finally, while Siemens does not see any upsides for our business from a potential Brexit, we also wish to make clear that the UK will remain an important market for us in the future. In our view, however, a decision to stay in the EU would be the right one for Britain and for the economy, and it would make it far easier for Siemens to continue to invest in and grow our business in the UK.

Here is the original actual link from Siemens pre-referendum that Remoaners like him gleefully quoted as part of project fear.

https://www.siemens.co.uk/en/news_press/press_releases/britain_in_eu_statement_from_siemens_plc.htm

and here is the post referendum link from Siemens:

Siemens has opened a £310m wind turbine blade factory in Hull with a warning that any EU tariffs will damage its prospects. The plant will create 1,000 jobs to service offshore wind farms...Juergen Maier, Siemens UK chief executive told the FT the original investment decision was made in 2014 with exports in mind. “We have a full order book of British orders for three years. We are ready to export. We have some work to get costs down. If by that point we find that tariffs have offset the cost savings we have made it will be a problem.

In a swipe at people who voted for Brexit because they opposed immigration, Mr Maier said in his speech that rather than taking jobs from British people Siemens’ German parent and Danish-based wind business had created them.

“This has been . . . German and Danish people helping to create 700 jobs in the UK,” he said. “Without them it would not have been possible.”

Hull voted 2:1 to leave the EU yet of the 700 people recruited so far from more than 23,000 applications, 96 per cent live within a 30-mile radius of the city. (Business Minister) Mr Clark said he was listening to Siemens. “I want this factory to expand and export. I have been very clear that the ability to trade without tariffs and bureaucratic impediments with our friends and neighbours on the continent is very important.

and here is the post referendum link from Siemens

 

 

Siemens has opened a £310m wind turbine blade factory in Hull with a warning that any EU tariffs will damage its prospects. The plant will create 1,000 jobs to service offshore wind farms...Juergen Maier, Siemens UK chief executive told the FT the original investment decision was made in 2014 with exports in mind. “We have a full order book of British orders for three years. We are ready to export. We have some work to get costs down. If by that point we find that tariffs have offset the cost savings we have made it will be a problem.

 

In a swipe at people who voted for Brexit because they opposed immigration, Mr Maier said in his speech that rather than taking jobs from British people Siemens’ German parent and Danish-based wind business had created them.

“This has been . . . German and Danish people helping to create 700 jobs in the UK,” he said. “Without them it would not have been possible.”

 

Hull voted 2:1 to leave the EU yet of the 700 people recruited so far from more than 23,000 applications, 96 per cent live within a 30-mile radius of the city. Mr Clark said he was listening to Siemens. “I want this factory to expand and export. I have been very clear that the ability to trade without tariffs and bureaucratic impediments with our friends and neighbours on the continent is very important.

So what Batman said was substantially correct.:

No Wes. Siemens cant be any clearer. They made the decision to invest in 2014. Not last week, not next Tuesday. The decision was based on being part of the single market and the fact they had a three year contract with the UK government to supply the North Sea offshore wind farms. However UK production costs are already too high for exports. If at the end of the North Sea run they have to battle tariffs on top of existing excessive costs then they are off.

You're quite right, despite the attempt from Shatlock to deflect from what they said during the referendum campaign by references to fruit picking and culinary practices.

 

Here is the original actual link from Siemens pre-referendum that Remoaners like him gleefully quoted as part of project fear.

 

https://www.siemens.co.uk/en/news_press/press_releases/britain_in_eu_statement_from_siemens_plc.htm

No Les - wrong again, my dimwitted, little kipper.

I'm not referring to what was said during the campaign (and indeed never cited Siemens during the campaign).

Im questioning the current claim of "no reason not to invest". This is the interview with the CEO - you'll see the tone is fundamentally different and more nuanced when put in context.

When analysing the state of the UK economy, he draws a significant difference between Siemens goods that are both made and sold in Britain, and those that are made for the export market.

 

He is bullish about the former, telling me: "There is no reason not to invest tomorrow, if there is a demand and a commitment from the customer.

 

"I am willing - and the company is willing to invest - further. There are more opportunities than risks for us."

 

But he seems much less certain when we talk about products made to be sold around the world.

 

He talks about the need for "ecosystem of engineering and manufacturing", which will depend upon new relationships between the UK and the continent.

 

We talk about the prospect of tariffs being imposed on sales between the UK and mainland Europe, be he seems sanguine.

 

"Tariffs would mean prices going up, and customers don't want higher prices. And remember that customers are also voters."

But what of the rest of the future trading structure?

 

"If you look at the letter from the Prime Minister, it is the explicit will of her and the Government to have free trade, close relationships and co-operation.

"But it would be fair to assume it cannot be as good as it would have been in a world where you give and take.

 

"If you look at Europe, Germany is the powerhouse of manufacturing and the UK is the powerhouse of financial services - the two together would be the perfect match.

 

"But now we do need to find a way for Europe - geographic, if not political, Europe - to be competitive with China and the United States."

 

When I ask what would be the single most important element he would like to see included in the UK's agreement with Europe, he ponders and then replies, emphatically, that it is free movement of labour.

 

The most important and also, perhaps, the most controversial.

 

Not sure why you need to fight others battles when you've got enough on your plate to make yourself look a clown

Lets face it, when its 29 (Including EU commission & parliament) to 1 and with our own politicians also dying to stick their oars in, then there is absolutely no chance of an amicable deal within 2 years. Our best bet is just to prepare for WTO rules.

No Wes. Siemens cant be any clearer. They made the decision to invest in 2014. Not last week, not next Tuesday. The decision was based on being part of the single market and the fact they had a three year contract with the UK government to supply the North Sea offshore wind farms. However UK production costs are already too high for exports. If at the end of the North Sea run they have to battle tariffs on top of existing excessive costs then they are off.

Just as well that the 20% devaluation of the £ will more than offset them.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Then you have to read my post - and the link to Professor Curtice's work - more carefully. Those figures relate ONLY to those voters to voted Labour in the 2015 election.

 

The colossal fallacy in arguments about Labour heartlands voting leave is the false assumption that these heartlands don't have any voters other than Labour ones. Even Corbyn - well, also Corbyn - has been guilty of making this error in concluding that some sort of accommodation has to be made to a non-existent majority of Labour voters in the north who voted Leave. The fact is - they didn't.

I think I pointed out that the poll did refer to just 2015 voters who had already shifted to UKIP. I think the stats you quote are still valid because they indicate that more Labour voters than might have been expected in labour heartlands voted leave. I think this is why the pollsters got caught out - you cannot poll 1500 people and not make assumptions. You could get 7 to 1 on a leave vote on the day of the referendum; it was that reason I voted out because I was inclined to the status quo but assuming a stay vote I indulged myself in a vote against the EU which I think is deeply flawed.

Lets face it, when its 29 (Including EU commission & parliament) to 1 and with our own politicians also dying to stick their oars in, then there is absolutely no chance of an amicable deal within 2 years. Our best bet is just to prepare for WTO rules.

I hope you are wrong and that the early stages are just posturing from the EU (and indeed ourselves) particularly with key elections coming up. Behind the scenes whether the remain camp can appreciate it or not, there will be frantic lobbying by those that will be directly affected. Take the French wine industry, they will already have been hit very hard by the drop in the pound. What will happen if they put tariffs on top? - we will just drink more new world wine. We are told that the German carmakers will not make a difference but surely they will be having a quiet word - we will just drive British produced cars. The Danish pig farmers will also already have been hit by the fall in the pound - look in the supermarkets and a year ago and your pork chops would be Danish now they are already British. The list goes on and on and this factor should not be understated. It cannot be denied that we will gain more financially from tariffs because we import a lot more to the EU than we export. Ultimately we will all lose out.

The worry is that the federalist fanatics in the commission will push for principle and not pragmatism. These are the same people that gambled in the negotiations with Cameron and gave him nothing to go back to us with - they are the ones who are really culpable for the leave vote. All they needed to do was allow us to change benefit rules and acknowledge that free movement of labour only works when wage per capita is aligned.

Hopefully common sense will prevail and negotiations will be driven by those that will have their livelihoods impacted but don't think that Juncker will have any less to spend on Brandy if it turns nasty. Everyone else will lose out.

No Les - wrong again, my dimwitted, little kipper.

 

I'm not referring to what was said during the campaign (and indeed never cited Siemens during the campaign).

 

Im questioning the current claim of "no reason not to invest". This is the interview with the CEO - you'll see the tone is fundamentally different and more nuanced when put in context.

 

 

 

Not sure why you need to fight others battles when you've got enough on your plate to make yourself look a clown

As usual, you're so far up your own arse, Mr. Consultant, that you are totally blinkered to the simplicity of the matter. Batman was contrasting Siemens' position during the referendum campaign when they hinted strongly that future investment in the UK could be affected by a vote to leave the EU, with the current position post referendum which gave a much more optimistic assessment of their future plans.

You can't just argue against something based on a before and after situation and then choose to totally ignore the before side of it because it doesn't suit you. It just makes you look ridiculous.

I haven't got anything on my plate causing me concern, especially not some narcissistic keyboard warrior who has to resort to puerile name-calling to get his jollies. And it isn't only me you do it to; it's pretty well anybody who disagrees with you. Any Brexiteer is a "kipper", others are denigrated as Baldrick, or other childish names. You don't seem to realise how badly your credibility is knocked by such infantile behaviour. If anybody is a bit of a joke, it is you. You're in danger of becoming a figure of parody.

No Wes. Siemens cant be any clearer. They made the decision to invest in 2014. Not last week, not next Tuesday. The decision was based on being part of the single market and the fact they had a three year contract with the UK government to supply the North Sea offshore wind farms. However UK production costs are already too high for exports. If at the end of the North Sea run they have to battle tariffs on top of existing excessive costs then they are off.

2014 was before the election in which Cameron had promised a referendum on our membership of the EU, so totally irrelevant to the point that Batman made. My link was to their statement made during the referendum campaign, which as I said, was used as part of project fear, and what I suspect Batman referred too.

If there is the prospect that they might have to battle tariffs, then they had better form a queue with other German industrial giants to knock on Merkel's door. If she is still their Chancellor, that is.

As usual, you're so far up your own arse, Mr. Consultant, that you are totally blinkered to the simplicity of the matter. Batman was contrasting Siemens' position during the referendum campaign when they hinted strongly that future investment in the UK could be affected by a vote to leave the EU, with the current position post referendum which gave a much more optimistic assessment of their future plans.

 

You can't just argue against something based on a before and after situation and then choose to totally ignore the before side of it because it doesn't suit you. It just makes you look ridiculous.

 

I haven't got anything on my plate causing me concern, especially not some narcissistic keyboard warrior who has to resort to puerile name-calling to get his jollies. And it isn't only me you do it to; it's pretty well anybody who disagrees with you. Any Brexiteer is a "kipper", others are denigrated as Baldrick, or other childish names. You don't seem to realise how badly your credibility is knocked by such infantile behaviour. If anybody is a bit of a joke, it is you. You're in danger of becoming a figure of parody.

You're all over the place Les.

I simply and only pointed out that the contrast was far less sharp than disingenuously presented by Jamie.

Once again is Siemens current position as simple as 'no reason not to invest'. Yes or no? Reread the interview if you're a little stuck.

Instead of addressing my simple and specific point -yes or no, Les- you instead backpeddle, deflect and dissimulate over several paragraphs in an ungainly mess.

If you were animal, Les, you would have been put out of your misery by now. It's getting cruel

I hope the negotiations don't go the same way this thread has.

You're all over the place Les.

 

I simply and only pointed out that the contrast was far less sharp than disingenuously presented by Jamie.

 

No, you didn't simply point out that the contrast was far less sharp than presented by Batman.

You are incapable of simply saying anything. You are a verbose windbag, so full of your own self-importance that you fail to realise that if there is anybody on this forum who dissimulates and deflects, it is you. You are the master of it.

More insults and you look ever more juvenile. As a rule of thumb on here, you should consider that if you used this sort of infantile playground stuff to insult somebody you were talking to in a pub, you would have had your face rearranged long ago.

No, you didn't simply point out that the contrast was far less sharp than presented by Batman.

 

You are incapable of simply saying anything. You are a verbose windbag, so full of your own self-importance that you fail to realise that if there is anybody on this forum who dissimulates and deflects, it is you. You are the master of it.

 

More insults and you look ever more juvenile. As a rule of thumb on here, you should consider that if you used this sort of infantile playground stuff to insult somebody you were talking to in a pub, you would have had your face rearranged long ago.

Uh oh, that sounds like a threat!

you would have had your face rearranged long ago.

Calm down and stop being such a plotz.

No, you didn't simply point out that the contrast was far less sharp than presented by Batman.

 

You are incapable of simply saying anything. You are a verbose windbag, so full of your own self-importance that you fail to realise that if there is anybody on this forum who dissimulates and deflects, it is you. You are the master of it.

 

More insults and you look ever more juvenile. As a rule of thumb on here, you should consider that if you used this sort of infantile playground stuff to insult somebody you were talking to in a pub, you would have had your face rearranged long ago.

Can the Siemens CEO current position be summarised as "no reason not to invest"

Yes or no, Les?

Simple question. Or did Batman cherrypick from the interview to distort that position.

I think I know the answer - your anger speaks volumes

No, you didn't simply point out that the contrast was far less sharp than presented by Batman.

 

You are incapable of simply saying anything. You are a verbose windbag, so full of your own self-importance that you fail to realise that if there is anybody on this forum who dissimulates and deflects, it is you. You are the master of it.

 

More insults and you look ever more juvenile. As a rule of thumb on here, you should consider that if you used this sort of infantile playground stuff to insult somebody you were talking to in a pub, you would have had your face rearranged long ago.

Rabid. You should have used caps lock to emphasise the effect.

Just as well that the 20% devaluation of the £ will more than offset them.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Nope. The euro-sterling exchange rate is almost exactly where it was when they made their decision in 2014. In any event a strong pound would help them atm and for the next three years when they are importing parts but supplying Britain. Its only after that when they are seeking to export that weak sterling would help.

Lets face it, when its 29 (Including EU commission & parliament) to 1 and with our own politicians also dying to stick their oars in, then there is absolutely no chance of an amicable deal within 2 years. Our best bet is just to prepare for WTO rules.

Get ready for WTO and let us make us a low tax economy to suck as much trade to centre here as possible.

It is ot what I wanted but we have to face up to the Eurocrats determination to hurt us. It is like trying to negotiate with Sepp Blatter

Bring on a World War with Spain. We'll hand them their straw donkey chorizo munching dago arses on an effing plate. They'll need more than a pint of Ouzo to drink when we've finished with them. Remember, some countries don't spend half the afternoon in flipping bed. Ka-boooom.

Bring on a World War with Spain. We'll hand them their straw donkey chorizo munching dago arses on an effing plate. They'll need more than a pint of Ouzo to drink when we've finished with them. Remember, some countries don't spend half the afternoon in flipping bed. Ka-boooom.

Just to bring home what utter numbnuts Brexiteers are, the Telegraph is actually talking this up, saying that even in its 'diminished' state, the Royal Navy could 'cripple' Spain in any war.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/

Incredible.

I suspect we will hear from lilly Allen very soon about the EU using people (gibraltarians) as bargaining chips

Twitter meltdown inbound I suspect

Just to bring home what utter numbnuts Brexiteers are, the Telegraph is actually talking this up, saying that even in its 'diminished' state, the Royal Navy could 'cripple' Spain in any war.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/

 

Incredible.

Am just thankful we kept the Trident deterrent*. Otherwise, how could we credibly enter the next stage of negotiations?

*the real one, now the plonker on this forum

Just to bring home what utter numbnuts Brexiteers are, the Telegraph is actually talking this up, saying that even in its 'diminished' state, the Royal Navy could 'cripple' Spain in any war.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/

 

Incredible.

I agree.

We only need the navy for the invasion of Portugal. After which it would be a ground war with air support coming straight from the UK. Arming the basque country will create a necessary diversion in the north and split Spanish forces in two.

#anothercunningplan

Just to bring home what utter numbnuts Brexiteers are, the Telegraph is actually talking this up, saying that even in its 'diminished' state, the Royal Navy could 'cripple' Spain in any war.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/

 

Incredible.

Not only incredibly dumb, but not true. It would be like France trying to hold Selsey Bill. Spain would just cut the land route and blockade Gibraltar.

Not only incredibly dumb, but not true. It would be like France trying to hold Selsey Bill. Spain would just cut the land route and blockade Gibraltar.

No need to blockade Gibraltar when they could invade. They could just march across the runway when the traffic lights changed from red to green. We need to send in the SAS to seize the traffic lights control centre and make sure that they stay at red.

Not only incredibly dumb, but not true. It would be like France trying to hold Selsey Bill. Spain would just cut the land route and blockade Gibraltar.

which they do anyway at times

I suspect we will hear from lilly Allen very soon about the EU using people (gibraltarians) as bargaining chips

 

Twitter meltdown inbound I suspect

Got a link to show that she's done this? Or is it all cooked up in your head for you to have tantrum with yourself?

Got a link to show that she's done this? Or is it all cooked up in your head for you to have tantrum with yourself?

“I feel like there’s things going on here due to Brexit, I feel it’s sort of like my responsibility."

"We must reverse Brexit as much as possible, so we can save these people"

that was some snowflake talking about the migrants in the camp over in France....in a string of weird, half-baked rants on twitter

took about 1 minute to find

Just goes to show how correct May was to not unilaterally grant EU citizens the right to stay. Had we done so I've no doubt Spain will link Gib to allowing thousands of Brits to remain there. I don't understand why Lefties seem to want to hand EU this concession for **** all. You can be sure of one thing the French, Spanish & Germans will use anything as a bargaining chip. I just hope May & DD have more backbone than than the snowflakes

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just goes to show how correct May was to not unilaterally grant EU citizens the right to stay. Had we done so I've no doubt Spain will link Gib to allowing thousands of Brits to remain there. I don't understand why Lefties seem to want to hand EU this concession for **** all. You can be sure of one thing the French, Spanish & Germans will use anything as a bargaining chip. I just hope May & DD have more backbone than than the snowflakes

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

By Lefties do you mean reasonable people as opposed to Xenophobic Knobs

Bring on a World War with Spain. We'll hand them their straw donkey chorizo munching dago arses on an effing plate. They'll need more than a pint of Ouzo to drink when we've finished with them. Remember, some countries don't spend half the afternoon in flipping bed. Ka-boooom.

Spain is a member of Nato and so any attack on them would be taken as an attack on all member nations. So we would have to attack ourselves to defend Spain who we were attacking.

Does that make sense??

Spain is a member of Nato and so any attack on them would be taken as an attack on all member nations. So we would have to attack ourselves to defend Spain who we were attacking.

 

Does that make sense??

It does. As a country we've been split personality since the bleedin referendum.

Spain is a member of Nato and so any attack on them would be taken as an attack on all member nations. So we would have to attack ourselves to defend Spain who we were attacking.

 

Does that make sense??

And wouldn't Spain have to come to our defence?