-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The UK votes to leave the European Union
- Thread starter Spring Drive
- Start date
- Status
He didn't say WHICH article 50. That was what he titled his letter of resignation.
He's letting his successor do it so they can hang themselves with it.
A new conservative leader doesn't force an election unfortunately.
The EU will never give the UK a deal better than what we have now with privileges. It's why people are saying this whole thing is stupid. You want the free market outside the EU, well abide by the EU rules, free movement of people outside etc. Oh. Basically we get nothing better but actually worse.
Epsilon-delta
Banned
This shit probably wouldn't fly in America. The politicians would be buried under a mountain of lawsuits.
RedSparrows
Member
And, if it's true that much of the Leave vote came from a place of anger and resentment at remote, callous elites, what the fuck is this going to unleash? We're already in a state because of it.
This to me is the worrying thing and it's not like we have a political leader who can get elected either. Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party are in shambles (I mean who'd replace him?) That if any real change was to happen it'd take 10 or 15 years... how can one feel hopeful about that?
PdotMichael
Banned
Yeah, I mean there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
To answer it in another way. I don't think there is any going back. Clearly the north of England voted out and in sufficient numbers to ensure the result. Just over the boarder we have a country that overwhelmingly voted to remain and is being lead by someone who is hell bent on being written into the history books as the person that delivered Scotland to freedom from the tyranny of Westminster..
When put in that context I would admit that there is very little middle ground here.
One way or another, it's pretty obscene that the people who were campaigning for this to happen clearly have no plan either. The people who voted for this must have been so bloody naive not to have seen it coming. Political chaos for the only two significant British parties, political chaos in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Blatant lies used throughout the Leave campaign, retracted moments after the result was forecast.
It's time for an adult to take charge of this fiasco. Respecting this referendum for the sake of 'accepting democracy' is like watching someone slit their wrists and doing nothing.
Leave campaign response to victory:
"From my perspective it's the EU who are evil!"
Leave campaign response to victory:
lol
Turn the Table: As a colony, break free and vassalize your former overlord without forming any other nation.
(...ish)
Actually, it reminds me of my last EU IV game: the scotts beat the english out of Britain (with my (Prussia) and Sweden's help) and formed Great Britain; the english were exiled in south africa...
Souldriver
Member
Well she's the only person who seems to be communicating to the public and making plans to get out of this mess, whether that is as Scotland alone or UK as a whole.
It's easy and cheap to say as a foreigner looking from the outside, but yes, British people really do seem to be getting screwed with the politicians that represent them. They all seem to be incompetent at best, and racist liars at worst.
Flintty
Member
Leave campaign response to victory:
Lol this would have been perfect if Corbyn was a Leaver. It's his fuckig doppelgänger!
His Majesty
Banned
Turn the Table: As a colony, break free and vassalize your former overlord without forming any other nation.
(...ish)
Double the Love (reversed): start in 2 unions and lose both at the same time
Epsilon-delta
Banned
Two completely different situations.
If you couldn't see it coming, you deserve everything that might be coming your way
I honestly don't know what Cameron promised in regards to Article 50 but to me it seems like he's just gone you know what fuck it. Whoever is next in line is basically in a no win situation, the position really is now a poisoned chalice.
You are correct though, the man should never of promised this vote in the first place.
The more I think about it, the more I want to know what was said in that meeting between Cameron and Boris. Think about the campaiging on both sides. Cameron said "if we leave, this bad shit will happen" and Boris said "If we leave this good stuff would happen" but noone mentioned the good and bad of if we stayed.
Cameron was leaving at the end of this term anyway and boris had ambitions for that job. If neither of them believed Leave could win it, they could just talk about Leave winning and then after all is said and done, we'd never find out if it was true because they were so certain we would remain.
I feel there's a possibility they agreed to do that because it was in everyones best interests at the time.
Cameron was leaving at the end of this term anyway and boris had ambitions for that job. If neither of them believed Leave could win it, they could just talk about Leave winning and then after all is said and done, we'd never find out if it was true because they were so certain we would remain.
I feel there's a possibility they agreed to do that because it was in everyones best interests at the time.
GamerMax73
Member
A properly united Europe needs the U.S. a whole lot less than you think. As for how much the U.S. needs its allies in Europe and NATO, given Vietnam, Korea and Iraq, I don't think you have the apostate as a nation to throw your weight around as much as you once could. From the American media we import I get a sense of a more inward looking nation that would bulk at the idea of getting involved in any armed conflict without European support. You've lost your apostate in being the world's police.
So no, it goes both ways. EU does need the U.S. more than the U.S. needs us them. Nonsense.
CyclopsRock
Member
I don't really see where this "queue" idea even comes from, other than as a convenient rhetorical device. In what mad world would a "queue" system be operated when it comes to trade agreements? Aside from another, whilst the US might well *care more* about getting a trade agreement with 27 countries rather than 1, that doesn't make it easier or quicker to obtain.
Edit: Also the EU sure does need the US, because aside from anything they allow Europe to basically ignore their defence spending.
Edit: Also the EU sure does need the US, because aside from anything they allow Europe to basically ignore their defence spending.
Don't you know? The US trade deals team is one guy and he's only allowed to work on one deal at once!
Flintty
Member
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
In any world, like the real one, where there are limited resources to deploy on a negotiation.
travisbickle
Member
Most US businesses probably work with the UK out of habit. It's not the 90's anymore, they could use any of a number of countries still in the EU and get a similar service.
UK need to get on with removing themselves from the EU because uncertainty will be the factor for US businesses looking elsewhere.
UK need to get on with removing themselves from the EU because uncertainty will be the factor for US businesses looking elsewhere.
Leavers have an over-inflated sense of importance, they still think the Great part of Britain is literal, this delusion of grandeur is what led us down this road.
RedSparrows
Member
Double the Love (reversed): start in 2 unions and lose both at the same time
Ouch.
Looking at this from an EU(lol)IV perspective, it's a bad move!
The analogy about the house was spot on.
It made me nostalgic for the late 1990s when we lived in a hopeful, optimistic world.
Even that wasn't enough for Blair though and he had to fuck that all up with Bush II.
I would love a first term Blair back now, just to guide us through the mess.
You asked for a miracle and l give you BLOJO.
GamerMax73
Member
Ignoring would be political suicide
There's no requirement, but the assumption is they will or risk political suicide.
It's the only real way out of this mess. All eyes are currently on what's happening in the Labour party.
You mean things like - loss of veto powers, loss of negotiated financial concessions, must join Shengen, must join the euro?
KonradLaw
Member
And USA needs EU ten times more than it needs UK. So you really think that they will jeopardize the future of the whole EU by trying to threaten EU into giving UK some sweet deal?
you think the US asks those European Countries to support it's military endeavors?
The 'Great' part of Great Britain is literal. It was to differentiate it from 'Little Britain', which has been, historically, either Ireland or Brittany in France. Hence 'Great' as in 'large'.
Bloody hell.
Wat.
I mean this sort of felt how it was but to start getting confirmation of it is something else. Man what I wouldn't do for a new episodes of The Thick of It on this mess.
This is such a tragic joke.
i don't think they will have to to be honest.
it is in everyone's best interest that the UK gets a good deal. that is why they will get a good deal.
PdotMichael
Banned
I hope they change the name to Medium Sized Britain.
RedSparrows
Member
Genuinely convinced a lot of people think it's an adjective derived from the might of empire.
CyclopsRock
Member
But is that the case with renegotiations? I imagine it's largely like, I dunno, independent enquiries, where a team is put together with resources to conduct that agreement and then dissolved afterwards? So having 5 going on at once doesn't cost more than simply doing them back to back. It would cost less, in fact, when you consider the benefits of having those free trade agreements in place sooner.
Well it did with the last two (Afghanistan and Iraq)
RedSparrows
Member
I think it's a matter of logistics, and the fact that deals necessarily affect one another. Can't give everyone everything all of the time. Some parties will lose out because of other deals nothing, ostensibly, to do with them. So sort out the big ones first. UK will not be a 'big one' compared to the EU, say.
There are only a finite number of people with the requisite skills to conduct major trans-national trade agreements.
It's the co-ordination of economic policy. Try getting the NRA in one room battling greenpeace in another. Different people argue for different things on different days.
It's why I hated the divorce analogy used in the papers. It's not a divorce. We're completely interdependent on each other.
I imagine the resources he means are experienced trade negotiators, of which the UK does not have many. So while having many going at once might be fine financially, it might not be feasible practically.
jakonovski
Member
How many trade negotiators does the UK have at the moment, and how will they get more?
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
Not so much the actual cost, but the availability of relevant skills. Like one of the UKs problems for negotiations with EU is we just don't have enough people with the right skills to do it.
EDIT: beaten by everybody - luckily with the same answer!
Cool Guys Britain
TatteredHat
Member
What he's describing is essentially the relationship that the UK already had with Europe, well done guys.
Sorry but OMG.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked