Off Topic EU deabte. Which way are you voting ?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

How will you vote in the EU referendum ?

  • Total voters
    74
Status
Not open for further replies.
God's Cock said:
After 10,392 posts, are Insufferable yid in Spain & Tobes theTwattish Tantrum Thrower really still stamping their feet and bawling about us winning the Brexit vote?

Happy days <party>
Click to expand...


They seem so confused by the fact people voted out, they hunt for grossly over-simplistic reasons why people must have voted the way they did, and then try to discredit their own in inventions.

They make predictions that are either bleedingly obvious, over exaggerated or simply wrong.

They prophesies doom and gloom, without accepting the fact that we are where we are and no amount of whinging will change that. It's looking at ways of maximising the opportunities and minimising the pit falls that needs to be the focus.

With all the information that everyone on here has at their finger tips, it baffles me how anyone can defend the EU as it has morphed into.

All the information points to us being in dire straits in the future had we stayed IN the EU. It's as though some think that the EU we would remain in, would be the one we're due to leave, when the evidence shows it was bad, and heading worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: petersaxton and Born again Humanitarian
Fez said:
You set yourself up to be some sort of authority on here, which is really amusing when everyone knows you're a thick **** who dwells on the Internet to lie and create argument. To be fair, you do work hard at it, though. <ok>
Click to expand...
I haven't 'set myself up' as anything, I've just posted opinion and fact. What lies have I told then? You seem to revel in calling people liars without foundation.
 
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
They seem so confused by the fact people voted out, they hunt for grossly over-simplistic reasons why people must have voted the way they did, and then try to discredit their own in inventions.

They make predictions that are either bleedingly obvious, over exaggerated or simply wrong.

They prophesies doom and gloom, without accepting the fact that we are where we are and no amount of whinging will change that. It's looking at ways of maximising the opportunities and minimising the pit falls that needs to be the focus.

With all the information that everyone on here has at their finger tips, it baffles me how anyone can defend the EU as it has morphed into.

All the information points to us being in dire straits in the future had we stayed IN the EU. It's as though some think that the EU we would remain in, would be the one we're due to leave, when the evidence shows it was bad, and heading worse.
Click to expand...
Your second and third paragraphs are quite ironic given your last one there.....which is exactly same thing that you're accusing the remain supporters of but from the converse viewpoint......
 
NowsufferinginSpain said:
Why is all this very old news about plans for a federal Europe being regurgitated?? In yet another desperate attempt to be proved right, I strongly suspect!

Yes, a federal Europe was the original plan. A plan none other than Churchill himself proposed and supported. That, however, was long, long ago. The world was a very different place.

In the real world of today, even arch federalist, Juncker, has conceded there is no appetite for it.

It is a plan conceived by politicians who, in their arrogance, just assumed public compliance. They were wrong then, they're wrong now.

I'm firmly convinced that any attempt to introduce federalism into Europe would be heavily defeated in most of the major constituent countries.
Click to expand...

Churchill saw Britain helping a new Europe but not being part of it.

He said: “Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine.”

“we are not merged with United Europe, we are a separate closely – and specially related – ally and friend, but we will not be subordinated into a federal system”.

“We are bound to further every honest and practical step to which the nations of Europe may make to reduce barriers which divide them and to nourish their common interests and their common welfare.
"We rejoice at every diminution of the internal tariffs and the martial armaments of Europe. We see nothing but good and hope in a richer, freer, more contented European commonality.
“But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed.”


As for the federalisation, the facts have been clearly shown time and again. I can only assume your denial is more about your definition of 'federalism' than as that's the only bit left open to dispute. We've passed on our higher court, the EU sets the finances and budgets for many member states, it is building its army, has its own european Police force sets the immigration policy and dictates trade deals. Sounds pretty federal to me.
 
Treble said:
Might be worthwhile reading the whole sentence including the opener, before commenting. Save yourself looking like a fool. :)
Click to expand...
I took that into account. How does it change what I said? No, it doesn't, you just like to throw around insults. It says plenty about you. Lies and insults that's all you do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: armchairblue
Tobes said:
Your second and third paragraphs are quite ironic given your last one there.....which is exactly same thing that you're accusing the remain supporters of but from the converse viewpoint......
Click to expand...

I can see why you claim that, but I haven't laboured that point, simply referred to it when talking of wider issues.

The remain type posters seem to be in denial on where we actually are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Born again Humanitarian
FosseFilberto said:
:emoticon-0136-giggl :emoticon-0136-giggl Sky, Sky ... please do stop ... your meandering, mid-table, mutterings of doom and gloom towards the EPL Champions elect are causing such paroxysms of mirth down our way that some of us are in danger of cracking a rib or two ... and not of the kind that you consider to be the height of fine dining on your regular visits to your local Harvester. No Sky ... in all seriousness - if you have read above you will see that we already have a replacement in should N'Golo decide to move on ... what's more, unlike that time when 'Pool lost fans favourite, Slippy G, and replaced him with Milner-Scuffit (Jerk of all trades master of none ... and certainly not the All Black winger that many deluded 'Pool fans thought they were getting) ... our replacement has the potential to be even better ... plus we had gone 15 EPL games only losing one before N'Golo made his full debut ...
Click to expand...

Can you summarise that rant please?

Here's some bad news fossy :1980_boogie_down:

Leicester forward Riyad Mahrez, 25, is also likely to leave the Premier League champions after turning down the offer of a new contract. (Guardian)
 
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
Not at all. I made one ill-informed remark as a feeble attempt at a joke, and held my hands up as soon as I was corrected. I've done similar earlier in this thread too.

If anything, it highlights the points you refer to in the post you quoted.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the post I replied to fella. So not sure where you're going with that reply tbh.

Fair play for the previous post, and I too conceded as I was out of order there.
 
Tobes said:
I was referring to the post I replied to fella. So not sure where you're going with that reply tbh.

Fair play for the previous post, and I too conceded as I was out of order there.
Click to expand...

I misread your reply, and I've edited it now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Saxton
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
Churchill saw Britain helping a new Europe but not being part of it.

He said: “Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine.”

“we are not merged with United Europe, we are a separate closely – and specially related – ally and friend, but we will not be subordinated into a federal system”.

“We are bound to further every honest and practical step to which the nations of Europe may make to reduce barriers which divide them and to nourish their common interests and their common welfare.
"We rejoice at every diminution of the internal tariffs and the martial armaments of Europe. We see nothing but good and hope in a richer, freer, more contented European commonality.
“But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed.”


As for the federalisation, the facts have been clearly shown time and again. I can only assume your denial is more about your definition of 'federalism' than as that's the only bit left open to dispute. We've passed on our higher court, the EU sets the finances and budgets for many member states, it is building its army, has its own european Police force sets the immigration policy and dictates trade deals. Sounds pretty federal to me.
Click to expand...


Churchill did indeed advocate a United Europe as you can see here.

I have conceded it was a very different time, but nonetheless he was never the little Englander, arch eurosceptic many UKIP supporters would have us all believe.

http://eu-rope.ideasoneurope.eu/2013/11/10/winston-churchill-a-founder-of-the-european-union/
 
Fez said:
Internet bravery, you really are a classless act. <doh>
Click to expand...

When someone is communicating with you on the internet. Then he is supposed to communicate with you on the internet.

You really are a thick twat. Your like that little ****y kid who always dishes it out then goes and tugs on his mum's skirt when he senses a bit of reprisal.

In your case your trying to belittle someone by calling him an 'Internet warrior' you do this every time you have had your arse handed to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Saxton and NSIS
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
I can see why you claim that, but I haven't laboured that point, simply referred to it when talking of wider issues.

The remain type posters seem to be in denial on where we actually are.
Click to expand...
I think the intital shock and to be frank - anger, has now gone and has been replaced by a head shaking, what the **** now then? From many, me included.

I think there's a lot of bluster and quite frankly deluded comments coming out of the Tories tasked with getting this sorted. The task now sits with them, and let's see what they can deliver. They've made some bold statements already, but talk is cheap. I think Davis will get a bloody nose when he finally gets to Brussels, but I hope I'm wrong on that, as from a personal standpoint all I want now is a free trade deal sorting. If he can somehow deliver that, then I'll happily eat ****.
 
  • Like
Reactions: steveninaster1
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back