Worth noting that it is fine to swear IMO as long as you are not abusing anyone else... Remember too.... that point a finger at someone else and it comes back to you too
What about Albania and Serbia ? The idea that Albania is about to join is nothing other than the feverish imagination of some Brexiters - Serbia I have no idea about, but there are no immediate plans for the extension of the EU, and every countries representatives have a veto on this anyway.
Anybody who was swayed to vote exit because Turkey and others had applied to join were really playing a long shot. Turkey has so many hurdles to jump that it's entry is at best years away. The others have tiny populations anyway.
When have you ever debated on here ? Debating means reading other people's texts and then answering them. All you are concerned with is ignoring everything which could disturb your world view, or which is inconvenient to you, and repeating the same old party dogma in a slightly different way every time. It may or may not be known to you but I also enter into debates on other clubs boards, but on none of them have I been confronted with anyone whose only apparent goal was to irritate, insult, provide snide comments to provoke and belittle every viewpoint which is not 100% in accordance with your own in the way that you do.
The future is almost by definition unknown but the EU is a stable trading and political block. Schengen did not involve us. Some countries would still like to join. To be honest just because the other countries cannot match us for recent growth suggests to me that we were doing rather well - not gives a reason to pull out - will Germany leave because it is the strongest country and others are letting it down - I don't think so. Does nobody remember the 1970s before we joined the EU - it could be a coincidence but the last 40 years or so has seen us prosper tremendously and gives no reason to exit a free trade club that gives us a much more powerful "home" market. The cost of membership of that club about half of one per cent of our GDP - quite a bargain in my book.
Hopefully you do not throw insults about on other boards as you do on here. You, my friend, come up with the same old left wing view on everything, at least you have not mentioned the merits of Corbyn recently and the dreaded 'party membership' angle that boringly went on for months.!!
Right little keyboard warrior aren't we ? You have insulted or provoked most of the people on this board at some time or other - so much so that many others have placed you on 'ignore', or stopped posting. What is your purpose in coming onto a thread like this if it is not to exchange ideas with other posters ? Have you ever been prepared to do that - or been prepared to actually read through other people's ideas and answer them without resorting to the same old one liners every time ? In addition this particular argument has nothing to do with left wing views - or how else could I be on the same side as Cameron, the banks, WTO. etc. ?
No, they are in the pipeline and going through the process. There is every plan to carry on EU expansion - it has to carry on like the South Sea Bubble it is.
What you cannot accept is any view right of centre. Your desperate attempts to find ways to disrespect the democratic views of the UK electorate show your reluctance to see an opposing point of view.
For God's sake read before you write, if I could not accept any right wing views I would not be arguing for remain in the way I am doing. Britain is a representative democracy in which sovereignty lies with the house of commons, the people have had enough time to change that but they haven't, and so, that is our democracy - so if the house of commons chose to ignore the result then they would be doing so according to the democratic traditions of our country - do you deny that ? Why was the referendum left with the loophole that it was not legally binding - did they simply forget ?
I think that if the referendum result had been something like 60-40 it would have been accepted whichever side one - even Farage only claimed he would not accept 52-48 against him. However such a close vote with two of the four nations voting remain mean that there is no overwhelming mandate. Given the direct lies told by Leave - as opposed to the "scare" forecasts of Remain which could prove accurate there is no reason why half the population would willingly accept a no going back decision against them. I am quite sure that we would not have heard the last of it had Remain secured a 52-48 majority. We were bounced into a referendum by UKIP and the result is too close not to continue the fight. If I were a Tory Remain backbencher I would not give up
The rules of the referendum were clearly known to all beforehand. The MP's will respect the view of the UK electorate and therefore will not prevent Brexit. The rules say leave has the required mandate because they clearly had more votes.
And one of those rules was that the referendum was only of an advisory nature ie. had no legal binding behind it, it is not, therefore a legal mandate - because mandate comes from mandatory - which it is not.
The MP's will respect the result of the referendum, any other action will lead to derision and loss of respect for parliament.
I think most MPs in the Conservative Party WILL treat the referendum result as conclusive. If the Tories choose a PM who does not call an election then I think Article 50 will be tabled and that will be that - we are out. If an election is called and Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party still then I think the Conservatives will get back in with the same outcome. The only scenario I can see that might change matters is if Labour sack Corbyn and adopt a Remain Leader who campaigns along with the LIb Dems, SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens on the basis that if they win we will not submit Article 50. That would effectively be a strong mandate to Remain so we would. I strongly doubt ths last scenario will come about - but you can hope.
I think all the candidates for PM have discounted an election, it would be daft to call one whilst the current working majority remains. The only reason would be to finish off a dying Labour Party.
One of the problems is that throughout the entire referendum campaign nobody knew anything about the actual content or procedure of Article 50, and many still don't understand it - is it a one way street ? Lawyers have interpreted it in both ways because there is nothing said about the possibility of reversal - the reality is though that there is no mechanism by which a country can be thrown out of the EU, which seems to imply that the procedure can be reversed. Certainly, the activation of Article 50 does not mean we are out - it means that formal negotiations can begin, but we do not yet know the result of those.
