Off Topic OLOF's political thread

And do you think when it comes to the crunch they are going to be able to rely on those little eastern European countries to help defend the rest? I suspect most of them will fall at the first hurdle and probably turn their coats as many of them did in WW2.

 

Whats with all the NATO talk, we are leaving the EU not NATO. There are plenty of EU counties not in NATO, one very close to home.

 

Your confusing NATO with the EU, we get protection under the NATO umbrella not the EU,unemployment is as low as it's ever been and I don't think it will change much, taxation, I don't see it changing much either for the next 4 years, then I think it will lower as the economy grows.Homelessness,can only improve with no 3 million none skilled workers coming into the country like the last 10 years.

 

I'd be very carefull if I were you. Australia admitted to the Eurovision Song Contest this could be the prelude to being caught in the EU net. How would your fellow countrymen feel about that I ask myself

 

No it was you saying in post #13337 that the EU didn't protect the UK and I pointed out as part of NATO they did. You are probably right though the EU don't but the member countries do as part of NATO.

 

Geographically it's a bit of a stretch of the imagination to consider Australia being part of the EU but you never know.

 

Well we were in the EU and NATO in 1982 the Falklands conflict, and they didn't then for sure.

 

So the benefits you see of leaving the EU are that homelessness will reduce and the economy should grow in 4 years or so.

 

And they are doing a trade deal with the EU, won't be long and they will dump a million Romanian tinkers on the Aussies.

 

I don't know why they, the EU countries or the USA, didn't help you, Perhaps it was because the Falkland aren't in the North Atlantic?

 

And no open borders, no being ruled by Brit hateing frogs and Germans, no being told we can't deport Terrorists and Rapists because it's against their Human rites, no being forced to take a quoter of refugees and give them priority while Brits who've paid taxes all their lives are at the bottom. I recon it's got 5-10 years and then it will disappear.

 

Our trade with the EU has been falling consistently since 2006.
You’re asking for benefits of leaving in the same way you’d be asking why we want to jump from a sinking ship, when it hasn’t sunk yet.
The EU is breeding extremist views in many of it’s members. The rise of so called Populist parties has been notable, AFD, Marine la Pen, Wilders... even far right parties are gaining support. Europe is not happy with how the EU is doing things but they can’t do anything because your vote for your MEP, in the big scheme of the EU means next to nothing. There is a storm brewing.
Virtually all of the countries in the EU are wedded to it by the money they get or the money they owe, or worse, by the same currency.
The EU doesn’t work but no one can change it. They have tried and all have failed.
There is no other free trade agreement in the world that asks so much of it’s members.
You ask for benefits of leaving, literally freedom to do what we need to do to for ourselves, whether that is good or bad.
If everyone had got on board after the referendum and we were able to show a united front we’d be out and a long way towards a great free trade deal with the EU now.
All the problems are because that didn’t happen

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...rand-coalition-ruled-out-far-right-vox-surges

The Media calls them far right.

 

So I'll take that as a no then

 

So as I said in my original post apart from "taking back control of the borders and making your own laws" the tangible benefits are reduced homelessness and an improved economy in 4 years or so.

 

I will ask you the question direct. "How would your fellow countrymen feel being governed by Brussels"?

 

20% of EU member countries are not even in NATO.

 

I wouldn't want to speak for anybody but me but being "ruled" by Canberra which is 1300 km from where I live isn't an issue. if I lived in Leeds then Brussels would be closer than Canberra is to me now. I can't see your problem unless it's some other reason other than proximity?

 

Is that a newsflash?

 

Not WJ spin Chesh, I was quoting the UK Defence Secretary during the conflict, John Nott. Think he’d have a better idea of what went on than any of us

Turns out France helped us a lot more than the USA:


FRANCE was Britain's greatest ally during the Falklands war, providing secret information to enable MI6 agents to sabotage Exocet missiles which were desperately sought by Argentina, according to Sir John Nott, who was Defence Secretary during the conflict.

In his memoirs he reveals that while President Reagan was pressurising Lady Thatcher to accept a negotiated settlement France helped Britain to win the conflict.

Although Lady Thatcher clashed with President Mitterrand over the future direction of Europe, he immediately came to her aid after Argentine forces invaded the Falklands in April 1982.

"In so many ways Mitterrand and the French were our greatest allies," Sir John says. As soon as the conflict began, France made available to Britain Super-Etendard and Mirage aircraft - which it had supplied to Argentina - so Harrier pilots could train against them.

The French gave Britain information on the Exocet - which sank the Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor - showing how to tamper with it.


"A remarkable worldwide operation then ensued to prevent further Exocets being bought by Argentina," Sir John says.

"I authorised our agents to pose as bona fide purchasers of equipment on the international market, ensuring that we outbid the Argentinians, and other agents identified Exocet missiles in markets and rendered them inoperable."

He contrasts the French attitude with America's attempts to find a face-saving deal for President Galtieri, the Argentine dictator."For all Margaret Thatcher's friendship with Ronald Reagan, he remained a West Coast American looking south to Latin America and west to the Pacific. Sometimes I wondered if he even knew or cared where Europe was."

Caspar Weinberger, the US defence secretary, supported Britain but the State Department was "dominated by Latinos".

"There was incredible pressure from the White House and the State Department to negotiate. It was hugely damaging," Sir John told The Telegraph. "They couldn't understand that to us any negotiated settlement would have seemed like a defeat."

Asked if he found it irritating that the Americans expected Britain's total support in the war against terrorism, Sir John said: "I am against the Americans smashing things up with bombing raids, then letting us be the auxiliary policemen to pick up the pieces."

Sir John says he held the Foreign Office "in deep contempt" for the caution it displayed when Lady Thatcher proposed sending the Task Force to the Falklands.