The Positive Brexit Thread

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

Just now, keelansgrandad said:

But are we likely to want to get involved? The US sees itself as either protagonist or mediator and the one nation that tries to impose its will or "protect its interests=oil" in areas. So it would likely be in a support role that we would engage.

Now is the time to realise that hundreds of years ago it may have been financially expedient to invade a country or start a war but now is a lose/lose situation. Surely the Falklands conflict illustrated his.

And as I said in another post, nuclear is a first strike weapon. And while we must not be held to ransom as a nation by the threat of violence, a better foreign policy and attitude might well alleviate the need for conflict.

Much I agree with you which is why we should have the minimum credible defence (and it must be credible - Corbyn was not).

The slightly larger point is that currently it is us and the French that actually guarantee the security of Europe from say Russia. Do you really believe that the US would go nuclear if say Russia rolled tanks back into say Austria or Germany? Of course not. America first. A quick nuclear strike by example on a UK small city - say Truro - surrender or the next one is on a larger metropolis and the next London. Its what happened in 1945 Japan.

Oh - NK has made orbit with a satellite. The issue is actually re-entry for a weapon but I wouldn't want to bet on it failing before NK was flattened.

This is pretty much exactly the reason why and the French have an independent capability - neither of us trust the Yanks in extremis.

Anyway off subject. Brexit simply weakens our international position and standing. A few nuclear weapons won't change that.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

7 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Much I agree with you which is why we should have the minimum credible defence (and it must be credible - Corbyn was not).

The slightly larger point is that currently it is us and the French that actually guarantee the security of Europe from say Russia. Do you really believe that the US would go nuclear if say Russia rolled tanks back into say Austria or Germany? Of course not. America first. A quick nuclear strike by example on a UK small city - say Truro - surrender or the next one is on a larger metropolis and the next London. Its what happened in 1945 Japan.

Oh - NK has made orbit with a satellite. The issue is actually re-entry for a weapon but I wouldn't want to bet on it failing before NK was flattened.

This is pretty much exactly the reason why and the French have an independent capability - neither of us trust the Yanks in extremis.

Anyway off subject. Brexit simply weakens our international position and standing. A few nuclear weapons won't change that.

We certainly agree on the last paragraph.

I have read much about the nuclear argument. For a long time I was in favour, based on certain arguments that it would be short, sharp and final.

But I began to change my mind when the superpowers decided for the rest of us. Yes, something had to happen and talks were good but all SALT really did was get rid of antiballistic missiles. 

Then I began to realise all they wanted was for no power to gain a march on the other. They weren't limiting anything except their worry about each other. 

I decided there and then, nuclear was not the answer.

 

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

I have no problems with a minimum but capable nuclear deterrent. We can't uninvent such a technology and it limits nuclear blackmail by rouge states. 

It not to fight China or Russia - they are rational.

However - leaving the EU certainly reduces our soft power and clout in the world which no UK conceivable military power can these days make up for. We ceased to be superpower at Suez along with the French when we were told by the US to go home (those with a quirky mind for history may recall that there was serious proposal for the UK and France to merge in the 50s as together we would still be superpower (Queen as Head of State of France as well!) 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jan/15/france.eu

Nobody should have nuclear weapons and you can unilaterally dispose of them, if you would have control over your antiquated never working sub based missiles. But if I would read the now much tabloidal Grauniad where comment is not free anymore, I would probably want to spent 60 billion on a petty update to them as well.

Roll on Scottish Independence, Norfolk can volunteer to dredge out a deep water port to house these relics, for another est. 25billion, we are already a prime target if the fuzz starts flying.

[SwindonCanary 455]

Whilst other countries have  nuclear weapons, I see no reason to remove ours, it's our best deterrent. 

Brexit 😉

[horsefly 4,344]

12 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

Whilst other countries have  nuclear weapons, I see no reason to remove ours, it's our best deterrent. 

Brexit 😉

You're definitely right there, Brexit is indeed the best deterrent to anybody who might want to invest in this country.

[Well b back 3,340]

12 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

Whilst other countries have  nuclear weapons, I see no reason to remove ours, it's our best deterrent. 

Brexit 😉

I see Russia are now claiming they paid a large part in beginning the split of Europe by meddling in the Brexit information.

 

[Well b back 3,340]

Rab’s leaked telephone call an eye opener.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, Well b back said:

I see Russia are now claiming they paid a large part in beginning the split of Europe by meddling in the Brexit information.

 

As Boris well knows but apparently now is not the time to own up.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

13 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

Whilst other countries have  nuclear weapons, I see no reason to remove ours, it's our best deterrent. 

Brexit 😉

Against what?

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

1 hour ago, Well b back said:

I see Russia are now claiming they paid a large part in beginning the split of Europe by meddling in the Brexit information.

 

Yes divide and conquer. Somebody got a bonus and Russian medal for this whizzo scam. Identified the inherent weakness in Western democracies in the social media age - the lack of a rational & informed electorate and it was as as easy as the Pied Piper. Sadly for Putin he couldn't get it to work a third time with Trump as many Americans had seen through it. Never-mind, 2 out of 3 isn't bad and the isolated UK is off now hunting around in the Indo Pacific long grass as opposed to it's far more significant European back yard. Job done.

[Herman 9,901]

37 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

As Boris well knows but apparently now is not the time to own up.

Anyone for tennis? 

[Bill 1,788]

One of Northern Ireland's biggest catering suppliers is buying less from British firms and more from the EU due to Brexit and the Irish Sea border.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56430392

''He said they have had to change 25 suppliers since the new year and one GB supplier is now charging an additional £150 per order to cover new administration costs.''

"He estimated extra administration costs for his business would amount to £50,000 a year."

Only someone incredibly thick would imagine that putting up barriers, checks and costs would not harm trade. Four decades of removing those  had led to quick and frictionless trade.

Is it any wonder that the UK is now being avoided...and that position will only continue to get  worse by the week

[horsefly 4,344]

50 minutes ago, Bill said:

One of Northern Ireland's biggest catering suppliers is buying less from British firms and more from the EU due to Brexit and the Irish Sea border.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56430392

''He said they have had to change 25 suppliers since the new year and one GB supplier is now charging an additional £150 per order to cover new administration costs.''

"He estimated extra administration costs for his business would amount to £50,000 a year."

Only someone incredibly thick would imagine that putting up barriers, checks and costs would not harm trade. Four decades of removing those  had led to quick and frictionless trade.

Is it any wonder that the UK is now being avoided...and that position will only continue to get  worse by the week

Yep! And all the government had to do was agree to match EU food standards to avoid the need for this massively expensive and time consuming proliferation of red tape. So why didn't they do it?

[Bill 1,788]

22 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Yep! And all the government had to do was agree to match EU food standards to avoid the need for this massively expensive and time consuming proliferation of red tape. So why didn't they do it?

Because one of the intents behind brexit was to remove regulation, and standards in such matters. To paraphrase Marie Antoinette 'let them eat crap'.

Unfortunately the thought among leading brexiteers was that the EU would be so cowed by the thought that "the EU needs us more than we need them" that it would conjure up special rules for the UK which would avoid what was previously known ie this shambles

[BigFish 2,001]

On 13/03/2021 at 17:40, SwindonCanary said:

Sadly, not true. In fact another @SwindonCanary post that doesn't age well. Seems like we are running low on the vaccine and vaccinations for the under 50s are postponed for at least a month.

[BigFish 2,001]

From the start of the programme, the NHS has successfully had to adjust week-to-week vaccine delivery in the light of fluctuations in supply.As previously notified, pleasingly this week and next see significant increases in vaccine supply. However,the Government'sVaccines Task Force have nownotified us that there will be a significant reduction in weekly supply available from manufacturers beginning in the week commencing 29 March, meaning volumes for first doses will be significantly constrained. They now currently predict this will continue for a four-week period, as a result of reductions in national inbound vaccines supply.

Surely not, they can't possibly mean that Global Britain was relying on imports for vaccines?

[Bill 1,788]

8 minutes ago, BigFish said:

They now currently predict this will continue for a four-week period, as a result of reductions in national inbound vaccines supply.

Surely not, they can't possibly mean that Global Britain was relying on imports for vaccines?

we need them, more than they need us......it would appear 🙄

[SwindonCanary 455]

After the EU's recent threat to block exports of vaccines (a vaccine that the EU had not even approved yet, at the time), and the backlash they received for it - and not just from a political stand-point, but also a moral stand-point.... you'd think they may have learned their lesson. Apparently not. They are doubling down on their threats today. This is not only trying to punish the UK, but other countries who have signed legitimate contracts for vaccine supplies. It's disgraceful, and once again highlights the fact that leaving the failed European project was absolutely the correct decision.

[Well b back 3,340]

4 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

After the EU's recent threat to block exports of vaccines (a vaccine that the EU had not even approved yet, at the time), and the backlash they received for it - and not just from a political stand-point, but also a moral stand-point.... you'd think they may have learned their lesson. Apparently not. They are doubling down on their threats today. This is not only trying to punish the UK, but other countries who have signed legitimate contracts for vaccine supplies. It's disgraceful, and once again highlights the fact that leaving the failed European project was absolutely the correct decision.

Shouldn’t matter, you and Moy told us they manufactured little or no vaccine and it was the U.K. that manufactured it. Were you lying ? Or did the magic Pfizer tree die. Will we threaten them with nuclear bombs ?

[horsefly 4,344]

2 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

This is not only trying to punish the UK, but other countries who have signed legitimate contracts for vaccine supplies. It's disgraceful, and once again highlights the fact that leaving the failed European project was absolutely the correct decision.

You utter twonk! The EU also signed legitimate contracts way back in August, and also paid up front for the vaccines in order to help fund the vaccine development. It was AZ who failed to honour the contract. And once again AZ are saying they will only honour half of the latest contract they signed with the EU. As a result the EU are trying to make sure they secure as many vaccines as they possibly can. Strange how you praise the UK government for snaffling as many vaccines as possible, but the minute the EU does the same you say they have behaved disgracefully. You're a total hypocrite and buffoon.

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

All countries hold the power to ban or limit any export - contract or not. Just a fact of life. Usually its dual use goods or sanctions but the vaccines are no different. 

[Well b back 3,340]

4 minutes ago, horsefly said:

You utter twonk! The EU also signed legitimate contracts way back in August, and also paid up front for the vaccines in order to help fund the vaccine development. It was AZ who failed to honour the contract. And once again AZ are saying they will only honour half of the latest contract they signed with the EU. As a result the EU are trying to make sure they secure as many vaccines as they possibly can. Strange how you praise the UK government for snaffling as many vaccines as possible, but the minute the EU does the same you say they have behaved disgracefully. You're a total hypocrite and buffoon.

On a different thread his mate seemed to be praising The US for withholding exports of vaccinations to the rest of the world and celebrating that that meant problems for the EU, but not realising that also meant problems lots of countries as the US have 100 million doses of AZ in their fridges that they are probably not going to approve.
It’s all very sad.

[Well b back 3,340]

4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

All countries hold the power to ban or limit any export - contract or not. Just a fact of life. Usually its dual use goods or sanctions but the vaccines are no different. 

Nuke the b******S 

[Yellow Fever 3,874]

3 minutes ago, Well b back said:

On a different thread his mate seemed to be praising The US for withholding exports of vaccinations to the rest of the world and celebrating that that meant problems for the EU, but not realising that also meant problems lots of countries as the US have 100 million doses of AZ in their fridges that they are probably not going to approve.
It’s all very sad.

Its certainly very sad and needless between us and the EU. They've exported 10M or so to us so a little help in return would go a long way to solving the problem especially as it appears the real issue lies with AZ being over optimistic.

VdL was probably very naive in the original contracts expecting all to pull together. 

 

[SwindonCanary 455]

45 minutes ago, horsefly said:

You utter twonk! The EU also signed legitimate contracts way back in August, and also paid up front for the vaccines in order to help fund the vaccine development. It was AZ who failed to honour the contract. And once again AZ are saying they will only honour half of the latest contract they signed with the EU. As a result the EU are trying to make sure they secure as many vaccines as they possibly can. Strange how you praise the UK government for snaffling as many vaccines as possible, but the minute the EU does the same you say they have behaved disgracefully. You're a total hypocrite and buffoon.

So why have they blocked the vaccine from going to Australia and why are they blocking our shell fish due to the waters yet they have been accepting all the time we've been in the EU ?  

[Bill 1,788]

8 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

So why have they blocked the vaccine from going to Australia and why are they blocking our shell fish due to the waters yet they have been accepting all the time we've been in the EU ?  

because cretins like you thought it a good idea for the UK to become a 'third country' ie non EU

therefore the UK would be treated as such - having to follow the rules that the UK voted on when it was a member

if you and the other thickos had bothered to listen you would have been aware that this and other consequence would happen

instead. like the sheep in Animal Farm. you bleated out idiotic slogans fed to you by your betters

'project fear.... baa baa'

[SwindonCanary 455]

And what about blocking  vaccine from going to Australia ?

[Herman 9,901]

I can't believe this. Our Tommy is a scammer? Surely fake news. First Nige and now this. I have been let down.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tommy-robinson-cocaine-donations-prison-b1787467.html

 

[Bill 1,788]

1 minute ago, SwindonCanary said:

And what about blocking  vaccine from going to Australia ?

So one down

And if you were not so stupid you would know why that is an idiot question

Now why not read up on that particular subject then come back with your thoughts

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/45877605

[Well b back 3,340]

1 minute ago, SwindonCanary said:

And what about blocking  vaccine from going to Australia ?

To date they have exported 41 million doses remind me how many America and the U.K. have exported.

As I mentioned you and Moy said we had invested so much in vaccine production and The EU had invested nothing and therefore had a supply problem. Based on the info you supplied us with why should we be remotely bothered that they are not going to Export any vaccine as they don’t have any vaccine to export and we manufacture more than enough on our magic Pfizer tree.

While you are here you could also maybe advise me as to way the U.K. are not challenging America about keeping all their vaccine to themselves, and not being very complimentary about the AZ vaccine of which they have 100 million doses ( estimate ) in their fridges with a possibility they may throw it away.