EU referendum are you in or out

[gumboot]

Yawn

FFS, get some sleep!

[KlaxonCow]

Or, alternatively, if discussion of the EU and Brexit bores you rigid then perhaps don't repeatedly click on the discussion thread that's all about the EU and Brexit, yes?

Look, up there. The thread title. You see how it says "EU"? I mean, it's not your first time to this thread, so you should know what's going on here by now. You can hardly claim to be deeply shocked and surprised to find folks mumbling and groaning about the EU and Brexit on a discussion thread, for a UK-based forum (with mostly EU-resident members), which is rather explicitly devoted to said topic.

If your head is bleeding, then perhaps consider maybe not repeatedly headbutting a brick wall. It might help. You never know.

[merman]

EU marks 50 years of stability.

In four days we've threatened to pull out of mutual security arrangements, threatened Spain* and plan to spend £500 million on changing the colour of the passports - WHEN IT WAS A UK DECISION TO CHANGE THEM TO RED ANYWAY.

*Downing Street and Theresa May refusing to condemn Lord Howard's comments.

[F-ZeroOne]

Its kind of curious how one of the first reactions to starting the withdrawal process [1] and throwing off the tyranny of the EU is to suggest imposing our tyranny on the EU... [2]

[1] Why is it everything to do with Brexit sounds like something out of "Fifty Shades of Grey"?

[2] I am using "tyranny" here in the same way certain areas of the internet and the media use phrases like "Shackles of the... ", "Oppression of... " etc...

[PFVA]

*Downing Street and Theresa May refusing to condemn Lord Howard's comments.

I don't know who gentleman is but that sounded me just like an idiotic populist comment who can attract the support of nationalist masses that like that kind of stuff and therefore guarantee votes. And probably an unconsequencial comment.

Argentina did invade the Malvinas aka Falklands. Spain hasn't invaded Gibralter and most likely won't.
Argentina was not part of NATO and had a dictatorship at the time.
Spain has enough troubles with Catalonia and the Bascan Country wanting independence to go around invading something else.
Spain and the UK are both part of NATO and NATO has lot of interest in controlling the entrance of the Mediterranean.
Gibralter likes to be British, always did. It gives them lots of business opportunities.
If Spain claims the right to Gibralter because it's located in Spain, Marocco will want Ceuta back based on the same grounds.
NATO, the EU, the UK and the USA most likely don't want Ceuta to be Marrocan even if Marrocco is a close ally of them.
And even the other countries of the EU may not want to give Spain total control over the Mediterranean entrance by letting them have Ceuta and Gibralter.

At the most Gibralter may want to have a referendum for independence like Scotland, to be able to join the EU as an independent country.

[gumboot]

*Downing Street and Theresa May refusing to condemn Lord Howard's comments.

I don't know who gentleman is but that sounded me just like an idiotic populist comment who can attract the support of nationalist masses that like that kind of stuff and therefore guarantee votes. And probably an unconsequencial comment.

I don't think lords need any support from the masses, do they?

[KlaxonCow]

I don't know who gentleman is

Michael Howard was leader of the Conservative Party from 2003 to 2005, preceding David Cameron in that position, and, before that, he was the Home Secretary and Secretary of State for the Environment under John Major's government, as well as Ministers for Employment, Housing, Environment and Local Government whilst Maggie was in power. So he's a fairly senior and well-known Tory.

(Also, because it's arguably relevant to note these things in light of him being all jingoistic and all this populist nonsense about immigrants going around, Michael Howard was actually born Michael Hecht. The son of Bernat Hecht, a Romanian who came to Britain in 1939, and Hilda Hecht (nèe Kershion). The family only became British citizens, changing their surname, when he was six years old. Not that there's any wrong with Howard being naturalised, and not born, British but, well, it does put his jingoistic "Rule Britannia" sabre-rattling comments in an odd light, doesn't it?)

[F-ZeroOne]

Farage reportedly commented that he was "not optimistic" about Brexit talks, which got me thinking about something I probably should have considered before - we all know UKIP wanted us out of the EU, but do they actually have a plan for after? Was it ever written down, or codified somehow? Or like (it sometimes feels) everyone else, are they just making it up as they go along? Did Farage really think that we would be sent off to our bright new jam-filled, foreigner-free future without any sort of reaction?

[Darkflame]

Of course not.
Pretty much every time people know what they dont want they dont know what they do.

[techno12]

Blimey looks like I'm stuck in a Remoaner liberal swamp here (75% to 18%)

Stop moaning!

None of us wanted the EU, we (or our parents) voted to join the EEC. Totally different things. We didn't vote in the 70s to join a crappy federal Europe.

So glad we're getting out!

[Harlequin]

None of us wanted the EU …

Would to care to define "us" in that statement?

[IMAP]

'Us' as in the general public ?

The UK's relationship with the EU is nothing like the trade only agreement that was voted for when the UK joined the EEC in the 70's.

So I guess nobody wanted what we have now and nobody was directly asked about the direction the EU should take.

Because of this, over the past 40+ years, the EU has morphed into the thing it is today?

[Cloudane]

I'm glad the narrative has fully switched to sovreigncy, at least, even from old Nige. I just wish the Brexit camp had done this and ran with "we only voted to be in the EEC actually" in the first place rather than appealing to racists so much (no I don't think all Brexiteers are racist, I do think it's a minority, some exist though) by labouring the immigration point to the nth degree and producing ridiculously provocative "breaking point" posters, stirring up fear, hatred and uncertainty. There was no need to win racists and xenophobes over, they'd have voted for anything that sounds anti-foreign already, and they might not have felt quite so legitimised in the days following the vote. Plus, who knows it might have even won people over who were on the fence but ended up not wanting to be on the same side as the newly emboldened racists.

[Dio]

It was quite obvious in the final week listening to R5 that the argument about who holds the reigns was the main rational one in their camp - there were some coherent arguments from leavers on that score, but the other 80% had no actual explicable reason of note, it was all a confusing and contradictory mess of anti-fact.

But to focus on that would have meant deploying rational argument rather than promising an undeliverable green and pleasant land which is all things to all people. They had no interest in doing that, and as an emotional rather than a logical campaign it wouldn't have made sense for them to do so - they would have lost, because it would have been obvious that even if there are advantages in more control of law (which I find hard to see, since of the EU and UK governments are slightly different but really one isn't clearly worse than the other) the disadvantages of going would then be laid very bare.

[Darkflame]

Personally I dont get why anyone trusts the UK government more then europe. On stuff like privacy abuses the EU was holding the UK back, out of the EU means less protections for citizens in quite a few areas.

'Us' as in the general public ?

So half the public isn't general?

So I guess nobody wanted what we have now and nobody was directly asked about the direction the EU should take.

You don't directly ask for much regardless, generally its done by voting people that match your views. (Id point out, no one directly asked for Theresa May)

I assume you voted in all EU elections?