British Indy: What Happens Now?

actually i read a fair bit of your post, but my point was that there may have been much duplicity among many but without the conivence of westminster , who ever the individual may have been, there would have been no sell out......
" illumination ",,, really,, sometimes it would seem that a phosphorus flare would not illuminate for some what is clearly obvious to others...

 

I agree, they want Scotland to become independent first then apply for membership which would take 5 years, let alone the time it takes for them to disentangle themselves from the UK and then agree to eurozone and schengen as a discouragement to their own provinces.

I also agree on your point on immigration (ie it's not racist for it to be a concern), I just didn't believe the Brexit campaign had a solution, they are already back-tracking on the numbers they think they can reduce it by if at all.

But all that's by the by, we are where we are. I've no idea what will happen now. It's a bit like the Labour Party, the members want one thing, the politicians another, we can laugh at it from the outside but actually it's a reflection of the state of the UK as a whole.

 

'Leave' Proved Right: Just Days After Brexit, EU Releases Plan For Further Expansion, An EU Army, AND Turkish Membership

 

bearing in mind there is always three sides to a story i pretty much agree with this. apparently dumbing down a society only happens elsewhere and and in other cultures. . but not being genetically equipped to deal with the chip on my shoulder probably explains why i just cant control me gob. :Hilarious::smileys:

 

That's about as accurate as the £350m a week claim.

However we do need to take note as a member of NATO, whatever our relationship with the EU is to be.

 

Just read this on faceache, I think it sums up where we are.
"
So, let me get this straight... the leader of the opposition campaigned to stay but secretly wanted to leave, so his party held a non-binding vote to shame him into resigning so someone else could lead the campaign to ignore the result of the non-binding referendum which many people now think was just angry people trying to shame politicians into seeing they'd all done nothing to help them.

Meanwhile, the man who campaigned to leave because he hoped losing would help him win the leadership of his party, accidentally won and ruined any chance of leading because the man who thought he couldn't lose, did - but resigned before actually doing the thing the vote had been about. The man who'd always thought he'd lead next, campaigned so badly that everyone thought he was lying when he said the economy would crash - and he was, but it did, but he's not resigned, but, like the man who lost and the man who won, also now can't become leader. Which means the woman who quietly campaigned to stay but always said she wanted to leave is likely to become leader instead.

Which means she holds the same view as the leader of the opposition but for opposite reasons, but her party's view of this view is the opposite of the opposition's. And the opposition aren't yet opposing anything because the leader isn't listening to his party, who aren't listening to the country, who aren't listening to experts or possibly paying that much attention at all. However, none of their opponents actually want to be the one to do the thing that the vote was about, so there's not yet anything actually on the table to oppose anyway. And if no one ever does do the thing that most people asked them to do, it will be undemocratic and if any one ever does do it, it will be awful.

Clear?"

 

Before you dismiss it ,I suggest you google "EU Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy",as I did.
This is the title of the EU document referred to,and then you can make your own mind up.
https://europa.eu/globalstrategy/sites/globalstrategy/files/about/eugs_review_web_4.pdf

 

Banksy

 

And a small taste of what's coming regarding Turkey,despite the denials:
"Second, the EU will deepen sectoral cooperation with Turkey, while striving to anchor Turkish democracy in line with its accession criteria, including the normalisation of relations with Cyprus. The EU will therefore pursue the accession process – sticking to strict and fair accession conditionality – while coherently engaging in dialogue on counter-terrorism, regional security and refugees. We will also work on a modernised customs union and visa liberalisation, and cooperate further with Turkey in the fields of education, energy and transport".

 

I did (follow the link to the policy document) and didn't conclude that "defence cooperation must become the norm" means a European Army. Isn't that what NATO does? This policy appears to suggest that each member of EU needs to provide a military capability rather than just rely on the big guns of NATO.

 

"We remain far from achieving our collective benchmarks, including 35% of total equipment spending in collaborative procurement. The voluntary approach to defence cooperation must translate into real commitment. An annual coordinated review process at EU level to discuss Member States’ military spending plans could instil greater coherence in defence planning and capability development"
We must strengthen operational planning and conduct structures, and build closer connections “EU foreign policy is not a solo performance: it is an orchestra which plays from the same score. Our diversity is a tremendous asset provided we stand united and work in a coordinated way.” “We must develop the capacity for rapid response also by tackling the procedural, financial and political obstacles which prevent the deployment of the Battlegroups. Enhanced cooperation between Member States should be explored in this domain. If successful and repeated over time, this might lead to a more structured form of cooperation, making full use of the Lisbon Treaty’s potential.” 48 European Union Global Strategy between civilian and military structures and missions, bearing in mind that these may be deployed in the same theatre. Enhanced cooperation between Member States should be explored in this domain. If successful and repeated over time, this might lead to a more structured form of cooperation, making full use of the Lisbon Treaty’s potential.

 

Don't get the problem with it.

The more countries that become democratic and turn their backs on religious, political division and hatred, then the sooner the world with become a better, safer place to live.

There is and always has been an underlying sniff of xenophobia about the Leave campaign.

The whole concept of the EU is to make Europe a better, freer and more cohesive place to be. That means the wealthier countries have to contribute more to make that happen.

Sadly we have chosen to go it alone and stick two fingers up to Europe.

 

They were told not to listen to experts and they didn't.

 

Any new accession state has to agree in principle to join the Schengen area and the Eurozone eventually, but is only allowed actually to join the area and zone when various demanding criteria are met - which may well take several years, or indefinitely.

 

Those who took the opposite view to yourself listened to all of the experts and made an informed decision based on what they heard.
Why do you have this constant desire to badmouth those who came to a different conclusion to yourself?

 

Indeed but that's not what Joe Public was told by the Sun and Mail. He was told that he could have the win/win situation for him of remaining in the single market while keeping Johnny Foreigner out.

 

And neither you nor nor anyone else will know the outcome of negotiations until they are concluded.
Merkel and Hollande are up for re-election,and many european citizens are also looking for referenda.
No one knows what the future holds-if you do,how about telling us next weeks Euromillions Lottery winning numbers?

 

I accept that some, perhaps many, did exactly that but believe the floating voters were hoodwinked. Lots of them believe that now too, I think.
Please show me where I have bad-mouthed anybody and I will apologise.