UKC

Nigel has said Britain is more likely to prosper after Trump confounds the pollsters and wins.
Has Nigel got it right again?

In reply to Jim 1003:

remind me what he got right so far?

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Brexit.

In reply to Jim 1003:

Who cares what that drunken haunted wank-sock says? The good folk of Edinburgh had the right idea, barricade him in a bar and wait for him put himself out of our misery.

What do you think to him taking German citizenship straight after convincing you to strip yourself of your EU priveledges and benefits? Me: I'd be quite cross about that, I'd feel I might have been cheated.
jk

In reply to Jim 1003:



Like the £350m per week to the NHS you mean ? That sort of right again ?

In reply to Jim 1003:

Well katie hopkins claimed she would f*ck off to the USA if Trump won. So assuming she aint as full of lies as Trump or Farage that would be a gain for Britain.

In reply to Jim 1003:



how has he been right about that? it hasn't happened yet.

In reply to Jim 1003:

you're not much cop at this trolling lark are you ?

In reply to Jim 1003:

I couldn't care less if we are better off financially or not - I want the climate to be better off, I want the rights of black people, Hispanic people, women, disabled people....well, people really, to be protected. I want this for our country and the states. If that happens to make us richer as a country, then great. If it doesn't, I still want those things!

In reply to girlymonkey:

What kind of Commie, Socialist, Guardianista, Trotskyite, tree-hugging talk is that? I bet you're one of those 'elites' with more than one GCSE and an income above minimum wage as well, aren't you?

In reply to john arran:

You have my elitist credentials with the mroe than one GCSE, but I'm self employed so you can forget minimum wage!! lol

In reply to Jim 1003:

Farage is a racist, xenophobic fraud of the worst kind. Why would anybody care what he thinks?

In reply to Jim 1003:



No.

In reply to jkarran:


I was surprised and angry to hear that Farage had applied for German citizenship so I googled it. Looks like it's not true, all I found were a few stories where was spotted near the embassy.

Do you have a link?

In reply to Jim 1003:



Has he given any reason why he thinks that? For starters he's promising to reduce trade abroad which would scupper UK's attempts to open a new trading front post Brexit. Cutting trade internationally would harm the U.S. economic position and as you know when 'America sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold'. His isolationist foreign policy will likely lead to more aggression from Russia in the Ukraine and the Crimea. It would likely lead to escalated aggression from Israel towards Palestine and a rolling back of the recent entente with Iran which would inflame the Middle East and the attendant issues that leads to. So the feeling of most informed commentators is that Britain is less likely to prosper but I'm keen to hear the opposing view because, right now, I'm in desperate need of some good news.

In reply to Jim 1003:

Don't feed the troll guys...

In reply to lummox:


To be fair to him, it wasn't his campaign that made this claim.

In reply to Tyler:


I heard this has now been superseded by

"When America Trumps, the rest of the world follows through"

In reply to Tyler: the reason he's (Farage) saying that is that he's a simplistic chav who thinks the president elect will smile favourably on the uk. I think thats wishful thinking and you give a decent list of reasons to start with.

Jim?

In reply to Jimbocz:
Only what you've likely seen, allegations, speculation and denials. Time will tell but he hasn't earned my trust.

Edit: Fair point calling me on it though, I should have said apparently claiming citizenship.
jk

In reply to Jim 1003:

Trump winning has already done us one massive favour - we're no longer regarded as the dumbest country on the planet.

In reply to jkarran:




It's better not to make things up or repeat things you don't know to be true. Come out your liberal/lefty bubble and see the real world.

In reply to Jim 1003:


'Real world' Why do you think it is that people on the left and the right can both think they live in the real world?

In reply to jkarran:




Darn, I've got to put away my pitchfork.

In reply to Jim 1003:

Tell me about the real world Jim like I asked on the other thread. Im sorry, given your apparent strength of opinion when it came to liberal lefties I thought you'd have no problem explaining what it was about their ideas and outlooks you apparently despise. Or perhaps walk us through your idea of better world if that's easier.
Jk

In reply to Jimbocz:


what? keep it out. I am going to look a right pillock with my burning torch on my own otherwise.

In reply to Jim 1003:
At least he has the grace and wit to freely acknowledge mistakes, and make amends. Admirable and a good example for the rest of us. You just double down on the ignorance. How did life damage you so much that you've become so ungenerous, so unkind? I pity you because your comments paint you as a person of bitter and unhappy experience.

In reply to skog:


Brilliant.

In reply to Tyler:

I don't think many commentators have given strong opinions on the effect of Trump's accession on the UK's prosperity but I think it makes a USA - UK trade deal far more likely than previously as TTIP is likely to be scrapped and Trump still has to do "good" (anglo-saxon?!) trade deals to legitimise his international postion and business credentials. UK products don't typically threaten poor, white American working class jobs.

Meanwhile his success must be sending an earthquake through European governments and the halls of Brussels who will be seriously pondering the wisdom of any "punishment deal" with the UK which might

a) accelerate the demise of the EU altogether as hordes of angry marginalised voters up-end the Brussels applecart. Some moderation of the EU's intransigence over FOM could perhaps allow national governments to address local migration concerns and stave off a total collapse;

b) potentially queer their own national pitch by setting a precedent for penalties which could turn round and bite them when their own "von Trump" moment pitches them out of the EU.

Food for thought.

Edit: spelling

In reply to BnB:

There is no EU if we get better terms than we had by leaving, it's not punishment, it's cold hard reality, we were already on favourable terms and the project is worth the short term hit. Trump doesn't change that and he'll be gone in four years gods willing, we'll still be haggling over the price of fish and how many working Belgians we'll accept in exchange for not having to take back nearly a million ailing retired from the southern states.
Jk

In reply to jkarran:


Oi!

In reply to jkarran:

Wallowing like a hippo glorying in the mud of his misery makes for some amusing posts I grant you but I fear for your sanity if you keep this up

In reply to BnB:
I'm not wallowing in anything. We'll get some sort of deal but it will be worse than what we had, it's simply inconceivable that we'll be better off nett for this process in the medium term. If that's what people want then so be it but I don't believe it is, we've been conned and I'm not going to quietly accept that even if you're willing to.
Jk

In reply to lummox:

I mean... I voted to remain and would not have backed Trump if I were American. I also don't like Farage.

However I felt the need to comment because currently you have twenty two green and only one red vote.

The guy never actually made that promise. It's unbelievable for 23 of us vs 1 to think he did. I really despair. Most here seem to be well educated and rational people yet they consistently fabricate arguments to suit their viewpoint as much as the 'facists' and 'liars' they oppose. Small wonder the events of this year have gone the way they have.

EDIT: I challenge anyone in this thread to definitively find something that Farage has actually lied about.

In reply to jkarran:



Why are you so keen on a status quo that leaves so many feeling marginalised? Why is your wealth such an important measure to you? Aren't you thereby repeating the mistakes of Cameron and Osborne?

An alternative referendum result might have bottled up people's frustration so badly it was your house the dispossessed came after a few years from now, not your Polish plumber (I'm 3/4 Polish btw). Think about it.

This is a chance to reboot the UK and I don't mean back to the 50s. I include the possibility that we retain FOM (in some form) yet focus better on the less fortunate socio-economic strata so that they don't feel isolated and uncared for. Economically, you appear to be in a blind panic and I just don't see your scenarios playing out. The government is acutely aware that they need strong trade to continue unchecked, no matter what their objectives.

In reply to jkarran:


I find it amazing that people argue like this -- that they have to give us a bad deal otherwise lots of the EU countries will want the same.

Well, if lots of the EU countries want the same . . . then why not give it to them?

In reply to Coel Hellier:

Glad to have amazed you. If lots of countries want better terms, less in, more out, more cherrypicking of rights and responsibilities then good luck to them but who the hell is going to pay for it?
Jk

In reply to jkarran:

"Who cares what that drunken haunted wank-sock say......."

Have a like sir.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:


http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/681776/nigel-farage-eu-refe...

"As a bureaucratic club it makes us poorer. Membership of this union stops us acting in our own national interest, forcing us to be represented by unelected old men in Brussels. " FAT LIE

You owe me a pint now

In reply to alastairmac:


And if I didn't already know what I thought of him, his recent comments about Obama and his cosying up to Trump would have settled it.

In reply to jkarran:


Sorry, but why would anyone have to *pay* for it?

In reply to Jim 1003:

My guess is that any kind of trade deal is a long time coming. If Trump is half as good as deals as his ghost writer made him out to be, then he'll know that it doesn't make sense to do a deal with the U.K. until our relationship with Europe is clear.

So the impact that Trump will have on the U.K. could be either as a result of his impact on the US economy or in foreign policy. On the economy the story is mixed. He will cut taxes and deregulate the financial industry. That may lead to a short term growth but deregulating the finance industry wasn't exactly a major success last time around. He has promised infrastructure spending but it didn't honestly sound very convincing.

In foreign policy, who knows...? maybe he'll pull out of NATO - although it seems unlikely. He could create just enough uncertainty to encourage EU states to start investing in their armies again. Whether that gives a fillip to the idea of an EU army or whether eu countries decide its better to keep defense a national issue is hard to say.

On the basis of the above, my verdict is, no idea but whatever impact there is, i doubt it will come in the shape of a sweet trade deal.

In reply to Coel Hellier:


It's well known in democracy theory (for hundreds of years it has been known) that if you can just get what you (as in you the voting public) want out of the system without regard for others, then the current batch of voters will simply empty the damn treasury and the democracy is over.
That would be fine if the end of the democracy only affected those voters. But it doesn't - it affects all future voters, and other entities such as the environment. Thus it should not be a light decision to empty the treasury.

In reply to SenzuBean:


But the sticking points between the UK and the EU are really not about the transfer of money.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:


No he said even more money would be available and he would like to see it spent on schools, NHS and doctors.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-nigel-fa...

In reply to Jim 1003:

It hadnt occurred to me until today but isn't there a massive conflict of interest him being the head of big business and the President. Too many conflicts of interest?

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

The Washington Post agrees with you
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/09/trumps-conflicts-of-...

In reply to KevinD:

I hate to be rude here mate but... have you actually watched the video you linked? Farage explicitly stated the net figure is £34m a day. That's £238m a week. I struggle to see how that's "even more money" than the £350m a week figure. 238 <350

Additionally, "I would like to" is not the same as "I promise".

Again. Farage is a cock. But attack the reality. There's plenty to attack. Don't build a facade that's easier to attack as his critics seem to have done.

In reply to SenzuBean:

Before you win your pint... evidence?

It seems to me the only thing that could be a lie here is the statement that entry makes us poorer. And even then that's insanely hard to pin down as a definitive lie. As we know (politics and spin aside and with academic hat on) it really can be argued that there are more efficient structures that would leave the UK better off. The problem was that achieving one of these structures is not only not guaranteed but would also require a long period of serious pain- a track we are now on.

So, I really am not convinced farage was lying here.

In reply to jkarran:


Standing ovation.


If you were thick-as-pigshit enough to have given anything he ever said about anything, ever, a moment's credence then this would have passed you by like a comment about quantum theory in a chimp's tea party.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:


I did watch the video. I also read the article and went to the other video included where he goes on at length.
Of course he didnt make that promise. In the same way that the other politicans didnt actually say those words and just stood in front of it.
However he was clear that not only did he think more money was available but where he thought it would be spent.

So not only did he fail, prior to the election, to disown that claim but he went even further.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:


I only italicized the 'unelected' part. The decisions are made by elected MEPs of which he has gone to visit, so he should know.

In reply to BnB:

I'm not keen on it at all. I'm appalled by the status quo we've settled for but the EU is not the cause of our malaise, in fact it has been alleviating symptoms of it in some of the poorest post industrial areas of our country neglected in their decline by successive domestic governments. Lashing out at the EU is not going to solve any of the problems faced in Britain today, if anything it distracts from them and economically almost certainly makes it harder for our governments to do so should they ever actually want or be compelled to. The very people lashing out at the EU are those most vulnerable to the ravages of our increasingly unfettered right wing government that does not give two shits for them or their plight, they haven't for decades, they didn't start on the 23rd of June. At least the EU has underpinned their rights and invested in them.

It's never been about the economy for me personally (though as I say I do fear for those who will be hit hard by the consequences of this), it's about the value of the union in bringing people and cultures together, the sharing of ideas, values and lives on a huge scale. About the idea of standing on a blood soaked foreign beach shooting at family, friends and colleagues I've acquired in the years of openness being utterly unthinkable rather than the every other generation norm it's been for centuries. It's about strengthening our position in the world by developing a less steeply graduated economic situation across neighbouring borders, about strengthening the political institutions and traditions of partners especially those newly released from totalitarian oppression even if that means for some years we as Brits are paying more than we get back in cash, we as Europeans benefit immeasurably. I'd happily be personally poorer for a more just, more equal world, one in which the services and institutions we valued were supported for the benefit of the nation, not managed into decline for the benefit of kleptocrats and ideologues. So that we could invest in our future, in clean energy, in science, education and health services that don't leave future generations facing insurmountable climate chaos and a mountain of debt, the ladder we climbed pulled up behind us as we age. Getting out of the EU does not achieve any of that, for that we need a courageous government, an educated populace and a measured press with responsibilities so that a mature fact based discussion can be had about sustainability and obligations.

Perhaps you are right perhaps I'm blinded by my nature and by casting off the perceived burdens of the EU, it's pesky regulations and rights, we're on the road to the sunny uplands of a thriving contented and secure country with a robust environmental protection, a functioning industrial strategy, strategic investment in declining areas and those in flux plus critically, a functional, humane safety net to catch those we miss or who cannot help themselves. I really hope you are. I'd love to be wrong about where we're going.


I did and the question really got to me. The idea of knowingly scapegoating others to save myself rather than addressing the root cause of peoples' fear and anger disgusts me. I'd rather fail trying to fix things properly and suffer the consequences than not try at all at someone else's expense.


This is the thing, I don't think after the turbulence much will ultimately come of this economically, probably not even socially. I could be wrong, we could fluff the exit negotiations totally but even then we'll eventually sort ourselves out a decade or two down the line. But I certainly don't think this government newly emboldened and likely in place for the coming decade is going to tackle the causes of our national discontent even if we were miraculously able to while managing such a huge change the sad reality is we'll just move onto the next scapegoat. Deal wise ultimately pragmatism will rule, the union will do enough to make sure remaining remains the better deal, they can't not, we'll get reasonable access to the various markets projects and institutions in exchange for financial contributions with some petty restrictions thrown in as a sop but we'll be on the outside, following blindly where the EU takes us when once we sat at the top table, not always leading but always with a voice that had to be heard. We'll have hurt ourselves in the years the separation takes and we'll have hurt our allies across the water. And for what, to pander to the addressable fears of a group that will likely be in a small minority by the time this is all done and who won't get what they want anyway, it'll be a different world and we'll be handing the reins over to a generation who grew up loving the rights, freedoms and values we've cut them lose from.

No. I absolutely will not get on board with this, I will not cheer-lead for it, I will not promulgate false hope. I will not be complicit in this madness.

Hope that helps explain my position.
jk

In reply to Jim 1003:


The biggest thing in Trump's plan is cutting corporate tax from 35% to 15%. This is probably why the stock market in the US is at an all-time high rather than falling like a stone.

If he actually does that - and I have no idea how he will balance the budget if he does - a lot of companies are going to want to pay their taxes in the US rather than the EU or UK. Even more so if he reduces regulation on finance which was another promise. It won't just be US companies simplifying their structure and paying tax at home it will be EU companies and companies from other parts of the world that currently list in London switching to New York. A tax cut of that size from the biggest market in the world is going to force other countries to cut their own taxes.

So businesses in Britain may well prosper but people dependent on government or supplying services within the UK may not.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:

His "Breaking point" poster was a vile and dangerous lie. Farage has blood on his hands.

In reply to BnB:


That's certainly a possibility but, like you say, his whole credibility depends on making "good" deals for America and that presumably means favourable to the USA, it depends on the desperation of the two parties at the time. In the mean time we can expect no favours as Anglo-Saxons as it seems the 'special relationship' is a thing of the past (if it ever existed), has he picked up the phone to Thresa yet?

Anyway, as we don't have a trading agreement yet I expect trade to be the more limited negative effect on UK prosperity, the greater threat comes with disengage the with NATO. Funny how we always bang on about US interference in world affairs and then when we are forced to consider the alternatives they don't seem too rosy either (I'm as guilty of this as anyone)

In reply to Tyler:

Seems there has been a very cordial conversation so no need to worry there.....

In reply to Trevers:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-nigel-fa...

In reply to jkarran:

I congratulate you on an excellent post. All your contributions are worth reading but this one adds substance to the emotion that is ever evident. I agree with much of what you say. At least until one tried to map Greece against those claims when your convictions start to look naive. When I voted Remain it was in spite of the EU's egregious economic errors and punishment of the Greek people. Set against that that ongoing episode your claim that the EU champions the little man rings very hollow.

Nevertheless the EU's crowning achievement is peace and I think you recognise that my point was not to celebrate the rejection of the EU. Rather we must act on the loud cry of pain.

Whether May's government does so effectively, and I don't mean by cutting migration although that will used as a measure of how well they listened, remains to be seen. But they are far more likely to do so as a result of the shock vote, wouldn't you say?

I've persistently argued that Brexit will not be as great an economic shock as many fear. And I argue that from a relatively well informed position. It's good to see that, behind the well-founded concerns, you can also recognise that pragmatism will likely win out.

I won't cheerlead for Brexit either. And it strikes me as ironic that my contrarion analysis across these threads garners a rich harvest of dislikes when my posts consistently predict a better economic outcome than people fear. I remain at heart a Remainer and I welcome the resistance building in parliament to a swift exit repented at leisure. The best deal for the UK, if we must exit, stems from a drawn out process that tosses the rule book away. The EU, like any institution, must bend to reflect the changing mood of its members, or it will fail. And you will see totems toppled before this is allowed to happen. I hope we are still at the negotiating table when this occurs. With Austria possibly about to elect a far right president, and general elections in France Germany and NL the EU's mutation could start as early as this Spring.

In reply to BnB:

Greece has suffered but its suffering is not all of the EU's doing, they egregiously mismanaged themselves for years while foreign banks preyed on their profligacy knowing they'd be bailed out, their losses socialised for fear of their collapse. The people of the countries robbed by their banks are responsible for Greece's harsh treatment and that includes you and me.

None of that negates the argument the EU has been a force for good investing in the neglected, underdeveloped and declining corners of Europe where domestic governments have failed. None of that negates the strong protections afforded to us as individuals by the EU, protections our PM has openly championed eroding.


Just because a patient is screaming for their diseased limb to be cut off doesn't mean a doctor immediately should if it's treatable in a less harmful way, they have a responsibility to do their best for the patient, not blindly pander to their fears.


No, sadly I wouldn't.



As I say, it's not the economic outcome I fear, it's the insularity we're opting for, the intellectual and cultural loss that entails, the stepping back from our responsibilities and connections to our fellow humans implicit in our nativist retreat. It diminishes us and impoverishes us in the way that no recession could. Now we've broken the floodgate perhaps there'll be noting to go back to anyway even if we wanted to, it's looking increasingly like we have very dark days ahead.

Likewise, I have a lot of respect for your considered posts and we broadly tend to agree.
jk

In reply to Jim 1003/BnB/Jkarran - re. trump and prosperity of the U.K., maybe the exact details of the U.K. With the EU is not the most important point. Trump seems to like the UK as you can play golf here, and we sometimes help America shoot other people, so he'll likely cut us a deal. But it will be a deal that benefits the US more. What we do with the EU, I doubt he cares.

Also , re. Prosperity - if he makes a balls up of the US economy, and the world shivers, will that help the UK?
If , as a result of our deal with the EU some financial services decide to move ops to New York, will he say 'no, stayin London so I can help the U.K.'

If he pulls.back on NATO and we need to spend more money?
Or if he stitches up Eastern Europe, weakening the EU (still our largest trading partner)

Just seeing Trumps effect on I as how e effects our trade deal with the EU is overly simplistic.

In reply to wbo:


I don't disagree
jk

In reply to BnB:

" The best deal for the UK, if we must exit, stems from a drawn out process that tosses the rule book away."

It appears that our bargaining position could be strengthened if Trump follows through on his NATO promises and makes other members become less reliant on them. France, Italy and Germany have all fallen short on their NATO spending commitments. The UK Brexit team should be leveraging this in the negotiations.

There's been very little talk of the imbalance in defence spending in the EU in the BREXIT debate. It's all been about how the UK wants it's cake and to eat it, so good to focus some minds on some of the heavy lifting the UK has been doing at the benefit of the EU

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

So, to clarify : you think the enormously complicated process of disentangling Britain from the EU could be sped up, what- to a matter of months because of Trump's earlier rhetoric about NATO ?

In reply to jkarran:

I agree with your views. But and it's a big but. The EU regeneration money has not really worked in the uk. I am in Czech h at the moment which has done well out of this. Nice new modern factories and good infrastructure. But here is the thing. Minimum wages are about euros 350 a month ........

I cannot think of a possible big regeneration of manufacturing in the uk whilst there is this disparity.

In reply to neilh:

That right there is the very reason why we invest in equalising or at least smoothing the economic situation across the nations of the union, ultimately across the wider world, why maintaining our position of privilege (built on empire, coal and a running start) while others are maintained in relative poverty can not work in a modern mobile world. If we don't our options are tribalism, protectionism, decline and eventual unrest or do nothing while hemorrhaging work and suffering the unrest that brings. There is no short term solution, it's why we need the inertia and momentum of something like the EU to smooth out the blips as we elect more or less introspective governments along the way. It's not perfect, there is no perfect solution but it is working, slowly.

That said, wages do also have to be weighed against local living costs and standards, I've never been but have friends and my understanding is Czech Republic is far from an unappealing place to live and work.
jk

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:

He studiously avoided saying the claim was false until after the vote was in...

In reply to jkarran:

Well the current EU method of smoothing it appears to be (1) FOM and (2) investing in infrastructure is leading to some big imbalances ................

On the NYT today it was taking about the fact that probably FOM being compromised a cross the EU but trade being left as is .

I am not certain. It maybe unfortunately we are heading in that direction.

In reply to KevinD:


I agree that he failed to disown the claim. However, he didn't ever lie about it.

In reply to SenzuBean:


Yep, fair enough. I'll give you that.

In reply to Pete Pozman:


Again, leaving my own views out of this...

Academically why is this poster a lie? Could it not be argued either way? How can a opinion be considered a lie?

In reply to Jim 1003:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37934790
Please can somebody wake me up from this nightmare.
It's like being in the Harry Potter film where all the baddies take over Hogwarts and they send Imelda Staunton to get rid of Dumbledore. It really does feel like a scary movie. The kids kicking over rubbish bins in Oregon reminds of the bit in Hunger Games where everybody goes berserk after the girl dies in the wood.

In reply to lummox:

Sped up? No that's not what I said at all. Reading it back I think it's pretty clear so not sure how you came to such a conclusion.

in essence, UK has spent and continues to spend more of it's GBP than France, Italy and Germany in it's commitment to NATO. Trump is also suggesting too many NATO countries rely on US military largesse without paying their fair share. Ergo, this point will probably be useful when EU plays hardball with UK on various matters.

One benefit the EU now has is it can form it's EU defence force (the UK always vetoed it I believe) Conservatively I would imagine at least £500 billion needs to be spent if they want to have anything that would give Putin pause for thought.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

I still don't understand how the Donald's isolationist stance and threat to EU NATO members would be an advantage to the U.K. If they upped their contributions, aside from some possible benefit in terms of arms deals and perhaps the U.K. not making as big a contribution , they still aren't going to substantially alter their position vis a vis trade. Sounds like just another big,beautiful wall to me.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Surely nobody believes we can rely on the USA now to save us if Putin moves. It looks like we'll have to form a European Army after all. What a paradox!

In reply to Pete Pozman:


IMHO, our Defence Secretary should never have been so dismissive of the concept of a European Army in the first place. It's surely going to become more and more essential once the NATO-disliking, pro-Russian Trump takes the helm.

In reply to Pete Pozman:

but I'm confident the Royal Navy's aircarft carriers would be able to see off the Russians like they did last week in the Channel ?

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


France's totally independent nuclear deterrent would give Putin pause for thought. Of course whether that would be integrated into an EU defence force is a huge question, French election next year, see how their populist right get on ect.

In reply to lummox:


Odd comment. We weren't trying to 'see off' the Russian fleet, they were legally going about their business whether we approve of that business or not, we are not at war with Russia and we are not staring down the barrel of a war with Russia unless someone (looking at you here America) does something monumentally stupid.
jk

In reply to jkarran:

I was being sarcastic.

In reply to jkarran:

although as an aside, there is considerable evidence that their business includes illegal attacks on civilians.

In reply to lummox:

Fair enough, there's so much hysteria about conflict with Russia flying about it's getting hard to tell
jk

In reply to Jim 1003:
I don't think the UK basing it's prosperity on US relations is a good idea. It's a hugely asymmetrical relationship, where we don't have real influence on US policy (unlike the EU). They do potentially change government every 4 years, which could leave us hanging if we became too dependent.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:


Well he claimed even more would be available and said thats where he would want to spend it.
Which is exactly what the other claim was. No promise but nice strong implication.

In reply to lummox:

I guess it boils down to how vulnerable the EU feels from the East, how expensive it will be to get up to speed if the US backs off slightly and how much the UK offers to step up in the event the US does pull some military home.

I think that is a bargaining chip, you don't. There it is.

In reply to lummox:


wonder if the yanks will still be borrowing the first one until we get some planes for it?

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Step up in financial or military hardware terms ?

In reply to lummox:

I would have thought in hardware terms. Financially we have been doing more than most of the EU in regards to NATO spend. Recent events across the pond should have brought this topic forward and possibly to the negotiating table if and when article 50 is triggered.

I'm not suggesting it means Brussels will roll over, just that it could improve our hand in negotiations.

In reply to Mike Stretford:

"France's totally independent nuclear deterrent would give Putin pause for thought"

Should do, although I wonder if Putin would gamble and still roll the tanks into Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Very hard to defend from Europe side and would an EU country (or US) make the first call re nuclear weapons? Unlikely. Is there an appetite to go all in to defend these countries by NATO against a very serious military?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

IT's not yet clear whether Trump's comments on NATO are to be taken literally, or whether he's just attempting to persuade those NATO countries spending less than 2% of GDP on defence to up their game. So many things are unclear about his presidency at the moment.

In reply to John2:

Sure. That's one of the most worrying things about him. On very few fronts have we any idea which way he's really going to jump.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:


I will give you top marks for your challenge however. It did change my perceptions of Farage - well done!

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

It's an interesting and valid point.we already have typhoons stationed in Estonia.

In reply to neilh:


How widely reported is this, I'll freely admit to not really paying attention much at the moment, but I learnt about this during a conversation with an Estonian girl who works for me, rather than through the usual media sources.

In reply to The New NickB:

I think with general elections, Brexit, Manchester United managers and Harry's love life there isn't many inches left to tell us there are four Typhoons stationed in Estonia .

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:



It was a lie Longleat. It conflated refugees escaping from war, and terror we can't imagine with EU citizens living legally in our country. It was suggesting we were at breaking point when it was the people in the poster who have longed passed through their own personal breaking point. Jo Cox died at the hands of a man shouting death to traitors. Others have died because of Farbage's Lies. He has blood on his hands but he has so little imagination he can't see it. They will never be clean nor will the Brexit campaign.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Having listened to interviews on Radio 4 with a couple of people who have the pleasure of having known him and worked with him, I think there's a real possibility that after 6 months or so Trump will be bored with the whole thing. What on earth would happen then? There's no provision for an early election in the US constitution.

In reply to John2:

isnt that exactly what happened with Dubya? he went to play golf, while Cheney ran the show

suspect similar, with Pence therefore left in charge.

In reply to John2:

I think the most optimistic possibility is that he'll have a relatively good/competent team and Vice-President behind him, who'll do all the work, and he'll just be a big, egotistical but relatively harmless figurehead. ... Well, i did say optimistic

In reply to The New NickB:

It has been reported in the mainstream press incl Guardian and BBC.also various trading exercises.

In reply to lummox:


How many aircraft carriers do you think we've got?

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Not quite sure what the motivation would be for the Russians to invade the Baltics? Crimea and SE Ukraine I can understand.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I believe Mr Obama has been known to frequent the golf course more then might be deemed appropriate.

In reply to Pete Pozman:

You see. I totally agree that it was an ignorant and spectacularly distasteful poster to run. But I just don't agree that it was a lie. And I will go further... I think calling it anything other than distasteful is counterproductive.

Why? For years we (liberals) have been labelling every opinion we disagree from the right as 'hateful', 'Islamophobic', 'sexist'/'mysoginistic' or 'racist' . Quite frankly the huge majority of these opinions, while f*cking idiotic are simply not any of the above. The idea behind tightening border controls can be driven by any number of factors aside from fear or hatred of those different to ourselves. It isn't always a racist opinion to hold. To debate whether or not Islam is fundamentally compatible with Western society is not by default an 'Islamophobic' question to ask. The list goes on.

I personally think this is why we have Trump in the Whitehouse and why we are leaving the EU. People who hold opinions and have questions that may well be quite valid are afraid to present them for fear of being labelled. As a result our moderate politicians don't ever address the issues. The result? A maverick (Farage/Trump) comes along and says things these people believe are unsayable. They are instantly won over because they finally feel a politician 'gets' them, and understands their fears. The left throw their toys out of the pram and go off on one about how Farage is a racist, sexist, Islamophobic liar... though he hasn't said much at all that gives us any insight either way on the accuracy of these labels. The left calls his supporters morons, idiots, 'little Englanders'. This just makes things worse. Watching the protestors of Trumps victory use these words in interviews just makes me sigh. They are fuelling the fire and I don't think they realise.

I think it's time we each try to rationally look at each point a politician makes and consider it carefully before we attach a label and take the Guardian as gospel. I don't agree with Farage, but I also don't agree with the character of him the left have manufactured. We have created an environment where people are afraid to ask genuine questions and we now see the result.

So perhaps, just perhaps, the "vile and dangerous" lie does not lie with Farage's poster, but with us labelling it (and by extension those who agree with it) something it/they are not.

Sorry if this sounds preachy, but it just pisses me off. And that's the end of the hijack of this thread! Sorry OP!

In reply to Jim 1003:

Who knows? The whole thing is a cluster f*ck.
I suppose it depends if you are a WASP or not.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:

Quite a lot of truth in that I fear

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Yes but it is an indirect deterrent. To let the opposition know that among the first casualties in any movements by them will be elements from multiple NATO countries - ie the likely consequences would be more than condemnation.

In reply to neilh:

Thanks

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:

Nothing terribly Liberal about the left.

"Liberal" is a noble philosophical strain, implying open-mindeness, tolerance for different views, ability to debate with others and concede that they have reasoned and legitimate viewpoints, even if not those one personally holds.

Hard to imagine anything more different to the modern left, either in the UK, Europe or East coast US. Humourless, authoritarian, conformist, punitive and dogmatic would be closer to the reality.


Your own mea culpa does not sound altogether sincere.

If you think that opposing views are "f*cking idiotic", that view will be entirely clear to those who hold them and your deathbed repentance will carry no conviction at all. Not least because they are in fact equipped with memories and can very well recall the familiar litany of abuse directed toward them, which in any case will continue for the forseable future from most of the institutional left.


It is certainly ONE of the reasons, maybe one of the more significant ones.


Until the dam bursts, then there is a flood that sweeps away everything before it. Had the sluice gates been slightly opened earlier, in some controlled way, the pressure could have been at least partly relieved.

Too late now. The popular verdict on the left is :

"Mene, mene, tekel uparsin"


On the contrary, it sounds, at last and far too late, thoughtful and with some degree of self-knowledge. The vast majority of the other comments, on the other hand ....,

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:


It was racist pure and simple.


No, only the extreme right. Mainstream Tory party is mostly none of these things.

I think you are plain wrong. Farage is extreme right. He has seen off the BNP, their voters have found a home along with lots who were in denial about their own racism. The BNP used to come second in lots of local wards in West Yorks, no longer. I am sure you are academically correct that he hasn't crossed some line, but he has gone as close as it is possible to go. But every body knows what he means.

I think lots of people are racist etc, etc. I used to do home improvement to mainly lower middle class white people, when you had finished talking about the weather, the next perfectly acceptable conversational topic was slagging off the Pakis.

Their views are unacceptable, period.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:

In that it gave people to believe something that was false the poster was a lie. It was intended to deceive as well as to encourage xenophobia, in the literal sense of the word.
Here's an admission : I sometimes have xenophobic feelings myself, especially when I feel out of my cultural comfort zone. But I try to bring my reason, my knowledge and my conscience to bear on the situation. Farage looks for and cultivates opportunities to stir up fear and hatred and he succeeds. He is a vile liar. And if you take him to be an English eccentric, he's fooled you like he's fooled millions of others.

In reply to Jim 1003:
In a year or two America will become America inc. an offshoot of the Trump Organization. The U.K. will be bought out in a corporate takeover and converted into a small island of plush hotels, golf courses and quaint real ale pubs overseen by Managing Director Nigel Farage. Millions of jobs will be created for caddies and cocktail bar people. Mrs Num Num and I are brushing up on our swing ready to grab a piece of the pie.

In reply to birdie num num:

Mrs Num Num and I are brushing up on our swing ready to grab a piece of the pie.

Couldn't Mrs Num Num be made into a theme park?

In reply to ian caton:

I disagree strongly. Had the poster said 'Australians welcome, Syrians not' then I may have agreed. As far as I saw it, it said nobody new is welcome. You'd need a bloody good lawyer to argue that was racist.



That may be so. But these 'lots of people' vote. And they voted for Brexit, they voted for Trump. Sitting there criticising them, calling them vile human beings, xenophobes, bigots and racists simply fuels the fire. We must appreciate they have issues that are socially difficult. Bring those issues to the forefront to discuss and begin educating on why they are misplaced. Prejudice is fought with education and dialogue. Not immediately telling them their views are unacceptable (so they bury them and only share them with similar people) and then calling them names (which widens the divide and weakens your voice).

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:

Clinton has just learnt that lesson......."deplorables"...... was not a good idea

In reply to Pete Pozman:

It was intended to scare people in to voting to close our borders. The intent seems to me to be the opinion that we already cannot cope so shut the door. Yes, it may have appealed to xenophobes, but I don't see how you can argue it was xenophobic in itself. I just doesn't follow. Sorry.


While it's great that you personally are able to analyse your own prejudices and replace them with reason, many are not so self aware. If I can be so bold as to say I think your thoughts are tinged with emotion given the language you use... I'd argue that contrary to Farage having fooled me, the reactionists have fooled you. Farage is a distasteful buffoon with a cause, little more.

If you replaced your references to Farage with 'The Daily Mail' or 'The Express', then I'd whole heartedly agree with you. These papers have a lot to answer for.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:

"We must appreciate they have problems that are socially difficult".

They are racist.

Ordinary working people means white.

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:



I don't disagree about the papers. My opprobrium is not solely reserved for Farage. I have the utmost contempt for Gove and, especially, Johnson who didn't even believe in the cause he blatantly lied for. But Farage is not only distasteful he has proved himself to be very, very dangerous as well.

In reply to ian caton:



You see, this statement is exactly the issue. You have taken an absolutely huge group (white working class) and called them all racists. And to what end? What do you hope to achieve? Do you think they'll listen to you now? Or do you think they'll strengthen in their resolve to not listen?

These people hold thoughts and have opinions like all of us. Like all of us they have the ability to change these thoughts and opinions. How? By being permitted to raise them without being shouted down. What is racist about asking if of NHS can support population increases in its current state? What's racist about asking if Islam is fundamentally compatible with Western democracy? Why not discuss them and work on a solution... together?

No moderate politician will stand up and speak about these things. It's political suicide. They'd be branded racists before they stopped speaking and face endless abuse. But, who is idiotic enough to do so? Those with nothing to lose. Enter Mr Farage. Enter Mr Trump.

What if we had more nuanced politicians asking these questions and doing their job (which let's remember) is to represent the members of their constituency with their concerns. A teacher doesn't get a child to understand mathematics by calling the child a f*cking idiot when they ask the teacher why we can't divide by zero. In much the same way a friend, relative, politician or police officer doesn't get a prejudiced child to become a rounded adult by calling them a racist.

If we don't let these people speak and if we don't engage them in debate, if we just call them all racists as you have done... then they'll turn to the idiots that do listen to them. The inaccuracy of the polls alone show people are scared of voicing their own thoughts. Who knows, we may end up leaving the EU despite we all know we're safely going to vote in... all the polls say so . Or what about President Trump! No chance of him getting in. Nobody agrees with him. Oh wait...

In reply to Pete Pozman:


Yes I thoroughly agree. These two did lie extensively. I think they are both shameful. Regarding Farage: I think we are united in disagreement of his opinions. . I'll think about what you've said though. Thanks for challenging!

In reply to Jim 1003: et al: so do you have any opinion on Farages assertion that the uk will do better with Trump as el presidente , considering all factors, not just the exact nature of the U.K.s relationship with the eu?

In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:

How do you do that bold thing? JavaScript?

I am not really in agreement or disagreement with your arguments about approach. I just believe that the fundamental issue is racism and that is the starting point.

I strongly believe that if the NHS was fully funded and Islam was found conclusively to be compatible with western democra (Like eh? Is christianity? Go listen to the the Reith lecture on creed) some other pretext would be found.

So how far can you go to discuss their racism?

Take yourself back to 1930's Germany and ask yourself what would have been, with hindsight, the right approach of Liberals to counter the rise of the National Socialists.

I don't have the answer to that question but believe that Hillary Clinton was right when she said that principles have to be defended every step of the way not just at elections.

In reply to ian caton:


Standard HTML code. < b >thus< /b > with gaps removed - thus
Ditto, using i instead of b for italics

In reply to ian caton:
It could be that many people voted for Mr Trump and for Brexit because they are racist, xenophobic, misogynist, etc.
We'll never know because most people won't admit to any of those things outside of their close circle of friends. Hence polls fail to predict people's real intentions.
I suspect but obviously don't know for sure and certainly can't prove that the characteristics that I mentioned are very widespread across all communities and will not be removed by either laws or education.

In reply to baron:


I think that Trump ( and many other businessmen) has probably made many a deal on the golf course( and signed it in the boardroom. ) Maybe Obama did his political deals there too.
On one of Trump's courses perhaps

In reply to baron:


OK, I can't hide anymore, that's exactly what I am.
Any other abusive stereotypical claptrap you want to throw at me, that's me as well. Fill yer boots pal.

In reply to Lusk:
I voted for Brexit.
While I like to think of myself as tolerant and fairly liberal I know deep down that the prejudices that I learned growing up are still there, I have to control them with logic and values discovered later in life.
Often my prejudices win.
Many of my friends, work colleagues and people I meet everyday express far more extreme views than I hold.
I wasn't condemning all Brexit voters but trying to point out that 'liberal' values are not the default values of many people.
I have no idea what your values are.
Feel insulted if you want.

In reply to baron:


And like you are LOTS more people who voted Brexit who ARE tolerant and are liberal, but they also realise that there is such a thing as being too liberal, and too tolerant, and things that in moderation, can be advantageous , can also be damaging.

There are a few people for example who believe that every country should absorb as many people as want to come there , and at any pace. These are often the same people who then call others, who don't share their definition of liberal and tolerant , ignorant, and xenophobic etc etc.
Which is not very tolerant of them.

In reply to Jim C:
Agreed!

In reply to Jim C:


Really? Have you ever met any? Outside a few free-market zealots, mostly in academia, I've never come across any, or heard anyone suggesting this.

In reply to ian caton:



What a wonderful black and white world view you have, it must save you a lot of thinking.

In reply to baron:

I thought you were of a similar viewpoint as me. Your post was good as any to sling my post into
If you're quick, you might get one of the last remaining tickets for me being burned at the stake show in Manchester tomorrow night.

In reply to MG:

"There are a few people for example who believe that every country should absorb as many people as want to come there , and at any pace. "




How many people do you think the UK should take in?

In reply to Lusk:
I'll be there!

In reply to baron:

Email me for me wife's account details so you can transfer £250,000.

In reply to Big Ger:

Lol, if only you knew.

In reply to Big Ger:

76.23 exactly

In reply to MG:


So, are you one of those who believe the UK should take in people from all over the world, but then refuse to offer any idea of how many we can take? Then that aligns you with the people you refuse to believe exist;

""There are a few people for example who believe that every country should absorb as many people as want to come there , and at any pace. ""

In reply to Big Ger:

No. I'm one of those people who think you're a bit of wally so won't give you a serious answer.

In reply to The New NickB:

It's a rolling deployment shared between all NATO members, the F15s from RAF (USAF) Lakenheath make up the major bulk of the force I believe, but the Germans, French, Italians etc all do their bit too.

In reply to Jim 1003:

I wouldn't count on it Jim.

The last dose of trickle down economic policy gave us the 2008 meltdown.
Trumps plans look like a super-sized version of the the same witches brew of Crony Capitalism, deregulation, and tax cuts for the wealthy (apparently the currently historically high inequality isn't providing enough incentive for the wealthy to invest!)

In reply to MG:

Hmmm....

Sorry, you've just outed yourself.

Ps. If I'm a "Wally" was does that make someone who cannot answer a straight question, someone such as yourself?

In reply to Jim 1003:

Not so much the Art of the Deal as Art of the Shaft.

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/11/11/donald-trump-companies-destroyed-emails-...

Donald Trump should be locked up!
Thought I'd try fighting fire with fire.

In reply to Pete Pozman:


none with planes, for a start ? Sorry, sarcasm clearly didn't work..

In reply to Big Ger:



How many people do you think the UK should take in ?

In reply to Jim 1003:

Prosper in terms of emotional well-being, freedom, truth, inclusive society or a simple one-dimensional debt enabled economic prosperity ?

In reply to lummox:

Where have you been? I got the joke ages ago... My response was in its turn ironic; or was it?

In reply to lummox:


I'd say we could possibly handle another million.