Author Topic: WTO rules?  (Read 42407 times)

JimSh

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 327
  • Country: scotland
  • My Honda: 2014 Honda Jazz ES Plus
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #210 on: February 05, 2019, 03:01:08 PM »
I am a Remainer, as I said before, but even I can see that all the noise around Nissan and Jaguar Land Rover is not really related to Brexit. It is down to changing demand for vehicles and these particular manufacturer's business challenges in re-configuring themselves for a world where Diesel is plummeting in popularity.

Which is why it would be such a mistake to break up the EU which has been responsible for maintaining peace in Europe for the second half of the 20th century.

And I am sorry but this argument doesn't work for me either. I think the UK and the USA and, to a degree, the rest of NATO, was responsible for that. I think what happens on the edge of the EU (former Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Turkey) gives a clue as to how the EU has been ineffective at keeping the peace. The EU is a political and financial union. When it starts to become some sort of military union, even I start to get concerned.

I didn't mean that it was a military union.
But if two guys are co-operating together to build an aeroplane. They are not going to be building their own aeroplanes to kill each other.

JimSh

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 327
  • Country: scotland
  • My Honda: 2014 Honda Jazz ES Plus
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #211 on: February 05, 2019, 03:04:25 PM »

About the only thing to come out of the entire Brexit debacle is that Scotland will never vote for independence.

I wouldn't bet on that either Jocko

Jocko

  • Topic Starter
  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4132
  • Country: scotland
  • Fuel economy:
  • My Honda: 2006 GD5 Jazz 1.2 i-DSi S in Vivid Blue Pearl
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #212 on: February 05, 2019, 03:23:32 PM »
I wouldn't bet on that either Jocko
I voted for Independence last time, but not next time. The principle sounds good, but the issues with leaving the EU would be multiplied if Scotland was trying to leave the UK. Besides, the SNP's input into the whole Brexit debate has shown me what a bunch of Numpties they are.

Barky

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
  • Country: scotland
  • My Honda: Jazz 1.3 SE CVT GK
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #213 on: February 05, 2019, 03:52:25 PM »

About the only thing to come out of the entire Brexit debacle is that Scotland will never vote for independence.

I wouldn't bet on that either Jocko

Would be utterly insane for Scotland to remain in a post brexit UK, all the supposed benefits of being in UK would be gone & Scotland would end up getting same trade deal with remainder of UK that France, Germany & rest of EU would get

Jocko

  • Topic Starter
  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4132
  • Country: scotland
  • Fuel economy:
  • My Honda: 2006 GD5 Jazz 1.2 i-DSi S in Vivid Blue Pearl
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #214 on: February 05, 2019, 04:25:23 PM »
Would be utterly insane for Scotland to remain in a post brexit UK, all the supposed benefits of being in UK would be gone & Scotland would end up getting same trade deal with remainder of UK that France, Germany & rest of EU would get
Take it you voted Remain. I am am ardent Leaver.

JimSh

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 327
  • Country: scotland
  • My Honda: 2014 Honda Jazz ES Plus
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #215 on: February 05, 2019, 04:35:10 PM »
I wouldn't bet on that either Jocko
I voted for Independence last time, but not next time. The principle sounds good, but the issues with leaving the EU would be multiplied if Scotland was trying to leave the UK. Besides, the SNP's input into the whole Brexit debate has shown me what a bunch of Numpties they are.
The only party who have had a consistent and sensible position in this shambles has been the SNP.
They have been treated with contempt by the government.

richardfrost

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 438
  • Country: gb
  • My Honda: Black 2005 1.4 SE
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #216 on: February 05, 2019, 04:40:32 PM »
But if two guys are co-operating together to build an aeroplane. They are not going to be building their own aeroplanes to kill each other.
You'd like to think that but tell that to those aboard HMS Sheffield, hit and killed by French missiles sold to Argentina. Or the many more victims on the General Belgrano, a former US Navy ship equipped with French helicopters and British Sea Cat anti-aircraft missiles, sunk by ourselves.

The prospect of a military force governed by 27 nation states in a political union does not fill me with a massive amount of confidence. The talk of an EU military is one of the things that has alarmed people on both sides of this argument.

I would agree that nations trading and working closely together can keep the peace between themselves in a potentially destabilised zone like Europe was, but it is not a strong argument for me. We don't see South American states at war with each other any more. Even Asia has been relatively free of localised conflicts that aren't at least agitated by super powers.

I think the real argument for political union in Europe was to create an economic superpower to compete with the USA and the USSR. With the rise of China, South Korea, Brazil and other economies, the effectiveness of this European super state is diminished by the need for it to be governed by an unelected clique in order to avoid constantly gaining the agreement of each individual state. That does make me nervous too.

And yet I remain a Remainer.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2019, 04:42:48 PM by richardfrost »

Jocko

  • Topic Starter
  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4132
  • Country: scotland
  • Fuel economy:
  • My Honda: 2006 GD5 Jazz 1.2 i-DSi S in Vivid Blue Pearl
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #217 on: February 05, 2019, 04:47:24 PM »
The only party who have had a consistent and sensible position in this shambles has been the SNP.
They have been treated with contempt by the government.
Once again it depends on your point of view and what side of the argument you are on.
Regarding Scotland rejoining the EU after Brexit and a Yes Indyref 2 vote, do you think the EU would want another land border with the smaller UK? And if it was a No deal Brexit, would Scotland want a hard border? Too many obstacles to contemplate.

culzean

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5111
  • Country: england
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #218 on: February 05, 2019, 05:46:42 PM »
The only party who have had a consistent and sensible position in this shambles has been the SNP.
They have been treated with contempt by the government.
Once again it depends on your point of view and what side of the argument you are on.
Regarding Scotland rejoining the EU after Brexit and a Yes Indyref 2 vote, do you think the EU would want another land border with the smaller UK? And if it was a No deal Brexit, would Scotland want a hard border? Too many obstacles to contemplate.

The only consistent SNP policies are being obnoxious in Westminster and wanting their cake and eating it in regard to wanting to be free of CFP but remaining in EU.  Scotland in the EU without UK would be exposed just the way Ireland was, but UK came to Ireland's aid many times, only to be stabbed in the back by Varadkar who chose to be the EU useful idiot in Brexit negotiations. A hard brexit will not be ideal for UK, but we will get over it,  but a hard Brexit will be catastrophic for RofI.

https://theweeflea.com/2018/03/22/the-great-betrayal-fishing-the-eu-and-the-scottish-and-uk-governments/
« Last Edit: February 05, 2019, 05:49:57 PM by culzean »
Some people will only consider you an expert if they agree with your point of view or advice,  when you give them advice they don't like they consider you an idiot

peteo48

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1442
  • Country: gb
  • I have entered the Jazz Age
  • Fuel economy:
  • My Honda: 2017 Honda Jazz 1.3 SE CVT Tinted Silver
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #219 on: February 05, 2019, 08:52:20 PM »
But if two guys are co-operating together to build an aeroplane. They are not going to be building their own aeroplanes to kill each other.
You'd like to think that but tell that to those aboard HMS Sheffield, hit and killed by French missiles sold to Argentina. Or the many more victims on the General Belgrano, a former US Navy ship equipped with French helicopters and British Sea Cat anti-aircraft missiles, sunk by ourselves.

The prospect of a military force governed by 27 nation states in a political union does not fill me with a massive amount of confidence. The talk of an EU military is one of the things that has alarmed people on both sides of this argument.

I would agree that nations trading and working closely together can keep the peace between themselves in a potentially destabilised zone like Europe was, but it is not a strong argument for me. We don't see South American states at war with each other any more. Even Asia has been relatively free of localised conflicts that aren't at least agitated by super powers.

I think the real argument for political union in Europe was to create an economic superpower to compete with the USA and the USSR. With the rise of China, South Korea, Brazil and other economies, the effectiveness of this European super state is diminished by the need for it to be governed by an unelected clique in order to avoid constantly gaining the agreement of each individual state. That does make me nervous too.

And yet I remain a Remainer.


Good post Richard and I think it encapsulates nicely that this Remain/Leaver debate is far too binary. I am a 60/40 Remainer and I think there will be 60/40 Leavers. I deplore this division that we are seeing now.

JimSh

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 327
  • Country: scotland
  • My Honda: 2014 Honda Jazz ES Plus
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #220 on: February 05, 2019, 08:57:06 PM »
But if two guys are co-operating together to build an aeroplane. They are not going to be building their own aeroplanes to kill each other.
You'd like to think that but tell that to those aboard HMS Sheffield, hit and killed by French missiles sold to Argentina. Or the many more victims on the General Belgrano, a former US Navy ship equipped with French helicopters and British Sea Cat anti-aircraft missiles, sunk by ourselves.

Maybe I used a bad example. I didn't expect to be taken so literally. Anyway I was thinking of Concorde or Airbus rather than weapons of war.
The Falklands War was a terrible waste of nearly 1000 lives. Was it really necessary?

The prospect of a military force governed by 27 nation states in a political union does not fill me with a massive amount of confidence. The talk of an EU military is one of the things that has alarmed people on both sides of this argument.

Is this much different from NATO?
Is it not better to have one army,rather than 28 individual ones?

I would agree that nations trading and working closely together can keep the peace between themselves in a potentially destabilised zone like Europe was, but it is not a strong argument for me. We don't see South American states at war with each other any more. Even Asia has been relatively free of localised conflicts that aren't at least agitated by super powers.


Are South American countries not united in a union (USAN) ?
http://www.internationaldemocracywatch.org/index.php/union-of-south-american-nations

I think the real argument for political union in Europe was to create an economic superpower to compete with the USA and the USSR. With the rise of China, South Korea, Brazil and other economies, the effectiveness of this European super state is diminished by the need for it to be governed by an unelected clique in order to avoid constantly gaining the agreement of each individual state. That does make me nervous too.

I think so but I would disagree with the "unelected clique" In lots of ways the EU system is more democratic than the UK system.(it  also seems to gain agreement a lot quicker than than the UK parliament during the current negotiations).
If any good comes out of this Brexit fiasco I would hope it would be the reform of our present effectively (or should it be ineffectively) two party confrontational system.


And yet I remain a Remainer.

culzean

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5111
  • Country: england
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #221 on: February 05, 2019, 09:22:46 PM »
Any of you guys who want to help sort out the backstop mess.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/judicial-review-of-irish-backstop/

Lord David Trimble is a Nobel prize winner and one of the original authors of the good Friday / Belfast agreement and he is concerned over the total mis-use of the agreement by republic and EU to justify a backstop.  Trimble has said before that the Belfast agreement should not have been used to weaponise the border issue.
Some people will only consider you an expert if they agree with your point of view or advice,  when you give them advice they don't like they consider you an idiot

sparky Paul

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Country: gb
  • My Honda: 2008 GE3 Jazz 1.4 i-DSI SE
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #222 on: February 06, 2019, 09:07:41 AM »
Lord David Trimble is a Nobel prize winner and one of the original authors of the good Friday / Belfast agreement

...and a Conservative Peer and committed leave campaigner. No thanks.

JimSh

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 327
  • Country: scotland
  • My Honda: 2014 Honda Jazz ES Plus
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #223 on: February 06, 2019, 04:15:09 PM »
Before anybody starts posting on soundbites on the television or in the papers, here is the full text of Donald Tusk's speech today.
It's the first time in this debate that I've heard any senior politician express any sympathy  for the people who did not want this fiasco.

 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2019/02/06/remarks-by-president-donald-tusk-after-his-meeting-with-taoiseach-leo-varadkar/pdf 4

culzean

  • Approved Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5111
  • Country: england
Re: WTO rules?
« Reply #224 on: February 06, 2019, 06:50:54 PM »
UK is a democracy and EU commissars do not understand democracy, certainly not at a nation state level, such things are verboten in the EU and not discussed much.  The EU have a track record of ignoring national referendums.  The pressure is telling on Tusk, he just wishes the whole thing would go away,  but it won't !! Watch this space.

Trimble is gonna make things a whole lot worse for EU when he exposes in court their cynical plan to illegally use the Belfast GF agreement to tie UK to EU in perpetuity...

Looks like Tusk and EU have finally got the message that there will be no second referendum with remain as an option because many labour MPs have realised they will not be forgiven by voters for frustrating brexit.  The Labour party membership has been infiltrated by remainers, but party members are different to voters, the members can say what they like,  but it is voters that count.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2019, 08:27:12 PM by culzean »
Some people will only consider you an expert if they agree with your point of view or advice,  when you give them advice they don't like they consider you an idiot

Tags:
 

anything
Back to top