UKC

It is often claimed that one of the many benefits of the EU is that it has kept the peace in continental Europe. Such claims conveniently ignore its lamentable failings when the former Yugoslavia imploded. Some claim that this was not the EU. But that conveniently ignores the many attempts at diplomatic resolution of the issues by EU (EC) leaders at the time. The reality is that it was NATO, and American intervention on mainland Europe, that once again restored peace. Not the EU. 

Some make the entirely bogus claim that the break-up of  Bosnia had nothing to do with the EU. A terrible lie, of course, and one which makes one doubt other statements made by boosters of the EU. The EU recognised Croatia in Jan 1992. Boxed into a corner, Bosnia declared its independence. Instead of safeguarding Bosnia's security, threatened by Serbia's predatory moves, the EU carved the republic into ethnically based provinces. It was this process that culminated in the Vance-Owen plan. So please, please do not pretend (JKArran) that this had nothing to do with the European Community. EU policy actually made matters worse. Much worse. It was not that the EU lacked the military muscle; it lacked a coherent, clear and enforceable solution. 

Here is the Washington Post at the time (EC for EU). 

"The litany of European failures is astonishing—numerous cease-fire agreements have been broken and none of the main commitments undertaken by the Serb side have been respected. This should not have come as a surprise. The Serbs had no reason to curb their campaign so long as the EC refused to flex its muscles to punish previous infractions. 

The EC's acquiescence to Serbia's diktat outraged the Bosnian public, infuriated the Islamic world and vexed the United States. On the moral level, the EC clearly failed to implement the main lesson of the Nuremburg Tribunal: "Never Again.'' However, this moral failure also carried a strategic dimension.

The EC's collapse in the face of genocide in the former Yugoslavia raises the question of whether the Community can ever operate a coherent foreign policy. This is the key challenge to those in Europe trying to devise a security architecture beyond the Atlantic alliance, framed during the Cold War. Bosnia is the acid test.'

I would argue they failed that test. 140,000 European citizens killed. And the EU keeps the peace in Europe? That's a much bigger lie than the Brexit bus stunt. 

https://bit.ly/2CmRvKg

The European Union arose, via the Common Market, from the European Coal and Steel Community which was a conscious effort by French and German politicians to integrate their country's' strategic industries and ensure that there would never be another major European war. In this they succeeded. The break-up of Yugolsavia and the resulting wars is another matter entirely and there were no easy ways for the EU to intervene. As you well know.

Funny how the French refused us entry to their little peace keeping club for years on end!

The EU is playing hardball with us right now, that was always to be expected. I think, at this critical juncture, it would be politic to be dignified and polite online and not sling excrement around like a troop of baboons.

Yep you’re right they’re all genocidal bastards let’s leave. And declare war on the way out.

I think you are self radicalising. Go take a rest.

De Gaulle said that we would be a disruptive influence. Turned out to be a good call? Incidentally I am old enough to remember the 70s membership applications. We were desperate to join because we had lost an empire and trade with the new commonwealth was disappointing, while the French economy had overtaken ours.

There's no way of knowing so it's not a view I'd promote but greater cooperation and integration seems to have done more good than harm. re. The Balkans, the Washington Post article you quote seems to be confusing the European community (small c) with the EC. The idea of a Brexiter complaining about the EU not having a coherent foreign policy or acting as a military force is pretty perverse. You are criticizing it for not acting in a way which, we both know, would have you wetting your pants if they did. 

Is there any reason to think that disbanding the EU would lead to longer peace or is this just another distraction? You're finding fault with the EU and then comparing it with some imagined alternate reality.

Yes, strange how when people look back to the golden era before the EU they forget we ended up  having to go cap in hand to another supra national economic organisation for a bail out!

I agree. Also, it isn't the Washington Post, John Yate's link is a 1993 article from the Washington Report.

Christ! You've got to admire his commitment in digging up obscure sources to back up his views. 

I wouldn't say we've 'lost' an empire, more ceded it to the various countries.  And now we have the Commonwealth.

As for European peace, mentioning no names, but who was it that started two of the most brutal wars in human history?  I think some people may have more of a moral obligation to strive and preserve peace than others!

John Yates is a Rus bot

Is it? Who has made such claims about Europe beyond the EU?

The EU has made war between member states more or less unthinkable. This alone is its greatest achievement and why we should welcome the membership of former eastern block countries and the former Balkan states. 

Forget the economic self harm; abandoning an organisation which has been such a force for peace and cooperation is what makes me most angry and sad about Brexit.

Your distortion in conflating this with the break up of Yugoslavia is a despicable new low for you.

'And now we have the Commonwealth.'

Yes, very handy being part of an organisation that has no power and increasingly tenuous links to countries 15,000 miles away.

What country is that far away?

It would seem Harry is getting a better reception in Oz than he might in Brussels, Paris or Berlin? Soft power or marketing. 

You're wrong. That's not hardball. Hardball would be, leave. No debate. If anything they have bent over backwards to try and progress things. It takes our idiots months to propose options and the EU moments to respond explaining the errors. The Eu represents 510m people in 28 countries, because 10 % want to leave do you think it should derail the whole institution. This is the same misguided view of the EU that the Brexiteers take, - they view it as UK (60 million) vs EU (few hundred bureaucrats).

Put is in perspective. Imagine if Birmingham voted to leave the UK. How much effort would you want the UK government into negotiating the transport of Cadbury's chocolate into and out of Birmingham, and the impact on the people of Wolverhampton when there are more important issues like climate change, the NHS, schools, etc.

15,000km not miles if you want to be pedantic. That's the country with a population of 24 million.

Belgium, France and Germany are 30km away and have a population of 160 million.

Just sayin......

I've read some twaddle in my time but that piece from the Washington whatever is lined up with the worst of them.  It fails to recognise for start that the EU was not a military union - that role was filled by NATO in the region.  It consequently brands the whole FY thing as a failure because the means available to the EU failed to stop people with an aggressive agenda that the latter were happy to implement despite outrage from the rest of the world.  The final echo of its feeble bleat is the absence of any consideration of what the EU should have done, when and how.  It is, however, a classic of its genre; ill-positioned from the outset and wandering via a few grandiose sentences to a trite, content-free, sound bite.

Effing great. Let's set up some complex interconnected JIT manufacturing with Australian companies then, that should work. Or import Irish agricultural products via New Zealand.

The EU isn't an optional club; it's the only rational way of organising a whole matrix of economic, social, development and environmental issues between governments bound together by geography and similar cultures and levels of development. It's not going anywhere, we will re-join and all this nonsense will be rightly seen as the greatest waste of energy, political capacity and cash - our cash - that we have ever imposed on ourselves. Ever.

Your argument is flawed.

Consider - it is often said seat belts make cars safer, but people with seat belts on are still killed in cars.

If you want to argue against the benefit of unity in preventing war you either need to show that within that group the occurrence of conflict is identical to a similar group not in a unit, or you need to show that the absence of conflict is not the result of the unity. Due to the limited geopolitical groupings on the planet it would be difficult for the latter, as for the former:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Europaea

See also the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize.

This Oz?

https://www.politico.eu/article/australia-queen-republicans-down-under-sick...

Possibly, but the level of programming required would be astronomical. Much cheaper to pay someone to post tripe like this

Really?

jk

Miles and kilometres.. it's not pedantry or rounding error; it's a totally different measurement. 

I know. Thanks for that. Eu population 0.5billion, less half of some individual countries and a mere fraction of global population. There is a world beyond Europe. 

There are other rational ways. Plenty G which ever number you choose countries seem to cope with only trade agreements. They don't need to share currencies, legal systems, governments, farming, fisheries etc. 

Isn't it simpler than that? Whether or not people wearing seat belts are always safe has very little relevance to people in the same town driving cars not yet fitted with seat belts.

The EU and its predecessors has been a great stabilising influence for its members, which the Balkan states were not (and largely are still not.)

Also, I thought the prospect of the EU having the ability and will to assert military power beyond its borders was one of the canards most likely to endanger the blood pressure of the swivel-eyed loons.

Which we currently have excellent economic links to and disproportionate bargaining power with thanks to our EU membership.

jk

And through the wto which the UK helped found, but lost it's seat at when it joined the eu fully. 

The UK never lost it's membership of the WTO, it lost its own schedule of concessions, relying instead on the EU's. We have through our EU membership trade deals far better than standard WTO terms with many nations around the world that we cede or throw open to renegotiation from a position of weakness by leaving. We don't gain anything by going back to trading on WTO rules alone (whether or not we founded it), doing so represents an enormous loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_trade_agreements

Are you seriously telling me you believe the guff that we're better off dumping 40 years of negotiated relationships for bare minimum WTO relationships? You still after all of what's happened this last year are trying to pretend brexit makes us better off? Pull the other one. At least you're insulated from the fall out of your folly.

It'll take us a decade to settle all the disputes we face in the WTO once we manage to pare off our share of the EU's schedule.

jk

or an information troop/GRU helper, just like the ones in the Cold war training films

I'm refraining from replying to the OP as it's like talking to a Lunar Landing Hoaxer and there is little I can say that is polite, suffice it to say it is enemy propaganda

In word no. I've never advocated a so called hard Brexit, I've nothing against any form of trade deal be it tied to freedom of movement or not. There is no requirement to wind back the clock, just get shot of CAP, fisheries, Strasbourg etc etc..

What I'm saying is most countries get by very well with only a trade deal, they don't have anything like eu and everything it's striving to become with ever closer union. 

Tough, it's what you're getting. Well tough for me and the rest of us that aren't insulated from this fu*kwittery. You've decided to do cosmetic surgery with a wrecking ball. The consequences were inevitable.

Most are forming up into blocs, the benefits are clear.

jk

Trading partnerships etc yes. I haven't heard of any wishing to start a new currency, subsidise each other's land owners, share fishing stocks, set up a special legal system, have open borders etc etc.. have you? 

I used to know this stuff rather intricately, I did an MA in European Security Studies whilst the Kosovo war was taking place, and most of what we studied that year used the Yugoslav wars of dissolution as a case in point. I then went on to do my doctoral dissertation on the security policy of another state post-EU integration. This is from memory, though, as I don't have time to check the timeline.

IIRC - Maastricht had just come into force, or at least was being negotiated and the EU was implementing the SEA as fighting started in Yugoslavia. Luxembourg held the rotating presidency at the time and again, IIRC, their Foreign Minister Jacques Poos (great name I'm sure we can all agree, flushed with Euro-optimism, uttered the immortal words "the hour of Europe has dawned". But it hadn't, CFSP was still intergovernmental and ESDP (joint military ops) were still a pipe dream.

Instead Yugoslavia got viewed with national contexts. The Germans were massively supportive of the Slovene then the Croat declarations of independence, the government was going through re-unification and had a very profound attachment to the idea of self-determination. They thought Croatia and Slovenia had exact the same right. There was also popular support, particularly in Bavaria as I remember it, for fellow Catholics.

The UK saw Yugoslavia through a completely different lens, that of Northern Ireland. The UK government actively lobbied against and tried to sabotage NATO/American-led efforts to stop the fighting, along with attempts to get a joint EU position going. Brendan Sims, "Unfinest Hour" makes the case in depressing detail - US diplomats getting buttonholed by FCO people whilst they were doing their shopping in a supermarket etc. The Major government was also actively resisting the EU getting more security and defence responsibilities. 

What Yugoslavia showed to most in the EU was that together they were still completely unable to deal security issues even just beyond our borders. I don't think it says anything about the EU as peace project internally, or its attractiveness being a stablising factor for the periphery (look at Serbia now as a case in point). If you want to blame some one beyond Yugoslavia (and Milosovic and Tudjman) for the wars, Her Majesty's Government at the time would have to carry some of the can.

Well there's this little place called the United Kingdom for starters and across the water there's the United States of America... So yeah, they're not all at the same stage of maturity or degree of integration but it's hardly a new or demonstrably failed idea.

jk

I guess we can probably leave this thread there!

The question is; can Mr Yates?

Absolutely right! Like Vietnam for example. Population just shy of 100million.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/asean/news/eu-vietnam-deal-seen-as-steppin...

Or Japan:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44857317

Enty

Yeah exactly, been together hundreds of years, they shared a common language, culture and currency etc.. before merging yet they still barely stable. Scottish devolution, Welsh devolution, the whole NI problem... so what makes people think you can merge 28 nations of differing language, culture, currency, history in the space of 2 generations and it will work.

The eu could work, if change was implemented over a century, so it molds slowly to each nations needs, rather than one size fits all forced up on them. 

Ps. You've still not explained why Europe must share it's fishing stocks or subsidise land owners... in order to have a trading partnership? 

Bah, who trusts experts!

Because fish do not recognise borders and swim about!

The US didn't and increasingly doesn't share common language or culture. Nor did or does the UK. Does something have to be perfect to be good or even better than the alternatives?

I don't think the EU can merge the peoples of Europe into something homogeneous in 2 generations, I doubt it could in 20 though other pressures may act to over the same time frame but then nor do I consider that a problem, it can be more tightly interlinked than it is today or less and still effective. The thing is where Europe gets to socially and politically under the EU it gets to by careful negotiation and public consent.

Yet instead of working toward that you seek to smash it up and escape just half way through the process... weird.

I really couldn't care less about the sharing of access to fishing grounds with neighbours, frankly done well it makes a lot of sense relieving some of the seasonal pressures on the fishermen and the fish stocks. That the EU gets blamed for the decline of the inlshore fishing fleet in the UK is a travesty, this is UK government policy and brexit will not change it. It is also a sideshow from an economic perspective, the harm done to revenue at a national level will have far greater impact on down at heel fishing communities than any crumbs the tories may brush down to them. Does anyone seriously believe they'll even bother with crumbs though?

CAP may not be the perfect implementation of an agricultural subsidy policy but for a continent that has known famine in living memory, whose farmers are under pressure from (desirable) minimum wage and environmental protection legislation it makes sense to ensure a continuity of domestic food production. Smashing it up and handing the pot of cash to the UK government to divvy out will just result in more grouse moors, more shooting estates and more expensive lawn ornaments being subsidised while the relatively powerless hill farmers and those small scale producers genuinely dependant on CAP quietly go bust or retire/die without heirs to the business.

Do we need CAP and common fisheries? No. Do they do some good? Yes, some. Do they do great harm? No. Does any practical implementation of brexit fix any of the perceived problems? No, most have domestic policy roots brexit does not address.

jk

The pressure on farmers comes from the supermarkets, large manufacturers and public who won't pay sufficiently high prices to make growing food economical. 

How?

At 40% of total eu budget CAP is anything but insignificant.

You might want to Google 'payment by result' which is already being trialled in north Yorkshire and expanding next year. It's the likely CAP replacement scheme and well be vastly better for the environment and farmers who actually do something, but not so good for pure land holders. 

So you're calling for patience, the long haul? What's the point of leaving then? Better to stay and be involved.

So how does leaving the EU address the imbalance of power between Supermarkets and their suppliers, this is regulated domestically. Oh and if you think brexit will change this can you show me which bus had "Pay more to feed your family" written on it? I missed that one and I'm not sure there's a right lot of popular support for paying more for essentials.

Powerful landowners with serious political influence, they may not be the force they once were but they're still a significant force. That said, I'm sure you're right, I'm sure they will be lobbying to be poorer out of the CAP rearrangement, pushing a fairer deal for small producers and tax payers. They always have the little guy's best interest at heart. You're not wet behind the ears, you know how this works!

Who's arguing otherwise?  We'll still need to pay the vast majority of what we do now to keep those farms farming unless we go for Minford's plan of abandoning agriculture (and industry) to its fate. Risky since we can't eat money.

As an argument for leaving the EU to escape the dreaded unreformable CAP you point me to an EU funded scheme (RBAPS) to examine reforming CAP lo and behold undertaken while we are still trapped within the EU straight jacket. You couldn't make this up!

Whatever Gove's window dressing looks like now it's genuinely touching you believe they have any interest in serious subsidy reform that won't be derailed in an instant by their backers who'd stand to lose from it.

jk

He's not replied since his OP I've noticed. A troll nearly inseparable from something he'd normally argue straight-faced is still a troll.

He, She, it, they are probably analysing their experimental results on a supercomputer

There should be, can't live off the benefits of using all the African water for growing food, deforestation etc for ever. Reality and paying the real price of eating the way we do needs to kick in eventually. 

Maybe when it's a purely UK driven scheme the population have more influence, can't just blame Brussels anymore. 

Yes and it's trial areas are being massively expanded by defra. Not the eu. Only last year's trial in wensleydale was eu funded, but as the UK is still under cap it wouldnt be any other way. I don't think the eu will take it up as the hugely influential French farmers don't like it. 

Many people in defra, nfu  etc.. think he is actually a bit of a closet green or environmentalist. He obviously didn't down well trying to reform the uk's Victorian school system, hopefully he'll have more luck here. 

Are you a Russian troll or an American troll?

Why respond to such a tirade of abuse. The EU failed Yugoslavia. NATO, through IFOR and SFOR and Dayton were essential to establishing a kind of peace. Once again the US came to the rescue of Europe. My point is not to advocate the dissolution of the EU. Simply to point out the lie that the EU guarantees the peace of Europe. It does not.  A theme runs through almost all these responses. An almost pathological hatred of your country, and those who have the temerity to take a different view, or to question the herd like mentality of the Europhiles. And the constant dehumanising of real people who you want to silence. It’s ugly and frightening in equal measure. 

Why respond to such a tirade of abuse. The EU failed Yugoslavia. NATO, through IFOR and SFOR and Dayton were essential to establishing a kind of peace. Once again the US came to the rescue of Europe. My point is not to advocate the dissolution of the EU. Simply to point out the lie that the EU guarantees the peace of Europe. It does not.  A theme runs through almost all these responses. An almost pathological hatred of your country, and those who have the temerity to take a different view, or to question the herd like mentality of the Europhiles. And the constant dehumanising of real people who you want to silence. It’s ugly and frightening in equal measure. 

I don't hate my country. I just hate the fact that it is being f*cked over by arseholes such as you with your lies and distortions. Sorry, I'm feeling a bit angry.

I think you meant ‘by’ rather than my. Unless that is your bent. I also think you rather exaggerate my power. It extends not much further than being able to wind miserable farts such as yourself into states approaching apoplexy. Take it easy Bobby.  Try some Anusol. As Bill Hicks said, it’s just a ride. 

Do you have children? Grandchildren? Independent means?

Do you beat your wife? 

Bit of a non-sequitur, but no. But I'm sorry that my children's and my grandchildren's future have been blighted by this nonsense.  They'll spend the next 20 years being vaguely embarrassed about their county's stupidity until we re-join - which we most certainly will. Get over it.

I’ve nothing to get over. Your side lost I imagine. I’m agnostic. 

It wasn't a security organisation at end of the Cold War, it's still not that much one now. What the EU (EC) had done by 91 is create a security community amongst it members. Apples and pears. The EU did apples but you're mad at it for not doing pears.

It's odd though that of all the former Yugoslav states they are either now EU member states or in accession negotiations so from FYROMacedonia to Slovenia, they seem to have forgiven the EU. Do you have any actual interest in Yugoslavia?

Well if by hatred you mean a desire to not to have our country hugely diminished in power, influence, stature, economy and turned into an international laughing stock; then guilty as charged. 

No one's saying the EU is perfect and I guess it's impossible to prove a negative, but in the 45 years from 1973 in European wars there's your 140,000 casualties, in the preceding 45 years there's 62 million (OK that's the whole of WWII, but Europe's probably 2/3 of that).  Even if you don't think it's likely that the EU was a factor in this, the numbers are so huge that it's worth sticking with it on the off chance that they were. 

Hi George. You failed to come back to me on a now archived thread where you claimed an ONS report showed 2 per cent drop in. The silence was deafening. I just think it is important that the distortions, half truths, and outright lies of the Remain camp are challenged. Chief among these would be EU keeps the peace.. EU economic growth (tell that to the lost generations in Spain, Greece and other club Med countries); and that free movement has been massively beneficial.

So, while you are on please send link to the ONS report that says 2.5 per cent drop in growth post the Brexit vote.

A close friend was a Major in Signals Intelligence from start to finish reporting direct to Sir Mike Jackson. I reported on it from the siege of Dubrovnic to Srebrenica. Beyond that, not much. It was not Europe’s finest hour. If you’ll forgive the mixed metaphor your apple and pears comment is a red herring. I’m actually agreeing with you that the EU was not set up to deal with the disintegration of a European state on its doorstep. That’s why it required US, NATO and UN intervention. And it’s why successive US administrations have tried to get the EU to increase defence spending to shoulder its share of the peace keeping burden. To no avail. 

Here you go John:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-uk-economy-office-f...

"The Bank of England and some independent analysts, including the Centre for European Reform, have suggested that the Leave result has held back UK GDP growth by between 2 and 2.5 per cent relative to where it otherwise would have been due to lower household spending, resulting from the spike in inflation after the vote, and lower business investment due to Brexit-related uncertainty.

The OBR described these calculations as plausible and in line with its own estimates, noting that the UK had slipped from having the highest growth rate in the G7 before the vote, to the lowest now."

I prefer to keep these discussions polite, and I've try to be on here, which is why I post under my real name (as do you).  Anyway, whilst you're calling remain's economic predictions lies, perhaps you could address the leavers claims: it might be a bit tricky as they deleted their website shortly after the referendum result.  Good job they didn't have anything to hide.  

Sorry about that, but I'm trying to limit my internet time as I find it a huge distraction and generally not good for the things that really matter: family, climbing, work.   

You are deliberately lying here, the US is trying to get NATO members to increase defence spending because NATO is a military alliance, the EU isn't. The message you are giving out is that you would prefer the EU to have a military remit, to intervene militarily in conflicts outside its borders and have a single foreign policy. If that is not your view then your critisism of it not having those three things (which would have been prerequisites for the EU to solve the Balkan crisis) is totally without point. 

Just being pernickety but I don't think you can be more than about 12000 miles from anywhere on the planet. Still a long way, though, compared with the proximity of the EU single market.

But there wasn't that bus was there. Brexit doesn't fix the world's resource consumption problem. Indeed the pro-brexit (largely fallacious) argument is by leaving we can gain access to cheap African and South American food by leaving the Union and slashing (already mostly 0%) tarrifs and non-tarrif restrictions on developing world food imports.

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

So that's a 'massively expanded' scheme of payment by results CAP subsidy, managed by the UK government agency responsible for CAP payments in the England, implemented while the UK is a member of the EU on the basis of findings from a study funded by the EU?

This good thing we're doing is why you voted out for us to be able to do it because it's impossible to do while we're within the EU?

Are the French more or less likely to agree CAP reform with one less powerful voice for reform at the table?

It doesn't matter a jot what Gove is or isn't, he serves a government that will do as it's damn well told by those who bankroll it, if he gets in the way he'll be moved and bright eyed grasping yes-man installed. Not that Gove will bite the hand that feeds.

jk

Haven't come across tripe like this since the last time I had the misfortune to talk to a cab driver.

Does the crap you post pass for rational argument in Little England?

The post ww2 settlement was undoubtedly far better than the previous settlements that did not prevent ww1 and ww2.

Proof: unlike my father and grandfather, there was never any shooting when my generation got to France. 

The development of the EU is a significant part of that settlement in that it can be low level travel, trade and now currency everyday stuff rather than military occupation or Cold War military necessity. 

I'm not sure which Remainers have made that specific claim, as opposed to the claim that the EU has meant there has been peace between the countries within its borders, which is the more common claim. 

You might like to have a look at this, which gives a pretty realistic assessment of what the EU has and hasn't contributed to European piece:

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/2016/05/how-valid-claim-eu-has-delivered...

I'm afraid your entirely correct point is far too subtle for consideration here ... The fact that the OP has denied this truth from the outset of the thread when it is pretty self evident for decades evidences that.

Where did the idea of EU as a peacekeeper in Yugoslavia  come from except from those who would use it as a denier of the point you make?

You might just as well argue with the GRU

Why let the truth(or facts) get in the way of a...

I know... I prefer to be optimistic that reason will prevail though

Well I suppose he might be telling lies but I'm taking a more charitable view that he actually believes the garbage he comes out with. In other words he's not a liar, just stupid.

A pro-remain paper which gives nothing but a few lines that say that the EU has helped.  No reference to things like the Marshal plan, no reference to the USSR, no analysis of anything else that's happened in the Europe in the period since the war.  Not sure what in there you found convincing.

Really liked this line "In a world otherwise quick to resort to violence, this is quite an achievement and not to be given up lightly."  What absolute bollocks.  In a world where unlike in the past war is very rare, and between developed countries is non-existent, people who like the EU like to claim it's responsible for peace.  That they were given a Nobel, like Obama, just points to how political that accolade is.

But nobody is claiming the eu is responsible for world peace. You and John assert that people claim it, but you're both liars.

What planet do you live on!?  Without any thought or googling: Ukraine, Yemen, Sudan, Congo, Libya, ISIS/Iraq/Syria all within the last few years.

I didn't assert that, and I can't see that John did either.  "The remain campaign point to the attainment of peace in Europe as one of its highest ranking achievements" says the New Statesman.

MG - That's rare, historically.  Do you really think that the New Statesman's comment stands up!?  We're in a world quick to violence where outside the EU people easily resort to war?

I'd put it  outside robust international groupings more generally, not just the EU, but with that, yes I do think they stand up.  Most of Africa, most of the Middle East, and large parts of Asia and Central America are unstable and violence (state or otherwise) is common.  The EU, along with related organisation such as NATO has been highly successful in preventing violence.  Many current EU states were at war in one way or another prior to joining and are now in position where it is unthinkable.

Only to 2000, that this suggest you are wrong on war generally

https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace

I've only skimmed, but as far as I can see that completely supports me, like Hans Rosling's research.

E.g - "Although wars are still fought, the world is now more peaceful than ever."

Yes, and if you bothered to read the piece it refers to the members of the union. Why you bother to persist in lying is a mystery. Do you want to leave because the eu isn't strong enough? Because it hasn't solved all the world's problems? Do you think that leaving will contribute to peace? 

Whatever, next lie please.

Care to quote where I've said what you insist I said?  Looks like you've blatantly lied to me, and you can't back up your lie.

Point me to some quotes from people saying the eu is responsible for peace outwith its borders.

You'll have noted that the New Statesman article, which I quoted, refers to Europe rather than the EU.  Personally I don't think it's primarily responsible for peace *within* it's current borders, let alone outside them, but I was responding to the New Statesman article which was said by Bob Kemp to be a "realistic assessment" of the EU's contribution.

Going to back up your accusations?

The title of the article is "How valid is the claim that the EU has delivered peace in Europe?". It refers to the EU extensively. 

So you can't find anyone who says the eu is responsible for peace outwith its borders. 

Carry on with the porkies .

So it should have been "delivered peace in EU" ?

What should? The claim or the title of the article? 

Going to answer Sir Chasm's questions?

Do you think that the EU helped or hindered the peace process in northern Ireland?

Another reasoned riposte. I’m surprised cabbies give you a lift. 

If I’d selected an article from the Spectator I can imagine the reaction. I’ll claim a Kerr on this one. Left the kettle on. 

Oh dear, not only have you lost the point of the thread. You have lost the plot. And no there is no lie. I imagine a deliberate lie is a redundancy since to lie must require an act of volition. I am simply making the point the the remainer claim that the EU has kept the peace in Europe is not true. The Balkan’s tragedy being a case in point. No more than that. The rest is fabrication on your part, and  profoundly wrong assumptions about what my remedy might be for a peacekeeping role in the continent. 

And thus the insults flow. And I thought the remainers were the voice of reason. Or is that just another fib? Before long MG will be around to call me a racist and Bobby to call me a regard. Not quite University Challenge. 

This is risible playground taunting. I’ll get my dad to beat your dad up? 

No, I can’t find a quote for your straw man.  You found where I talked about the EU claiming responsibility for world peace yet?  Accusing people of lies with a lie is...well expected I suppose.

Bob - are you saying that where they wrote Europe they actually meant EU?

Andy Hardy - neither.

Could I gently suggest this as a counterpoint to the NS piece. It is from the equally pro Remain FT and makes the reasonable case that the EU is not the source of peace, indeed it is now the source of friction. I can hear the dogs howling at the gate already, spittle on the lips of MG and Pasbury, the yap yap yap of Mr Arran as the frenzy of righteous indignation froths over. This time, least be a little more inventive in your invective. But first take a sip of this, it might just be a sedative...down boys..

https://www.ft.com/content/bdac2df6-598a-11e6-9f70-badea1b336d4

Why don't you stop doing it then?

- and many more...

It’s not an easy road to walk, and there are no rewards. Save perhaps the joy that comes with pricking their pompous prejudices. 

Risible playground taunting. Give it a rest John, it undermines any case you might have.

You reap what you sow Bobby Boy. 

Nice to see you've got serious intent John. Do you know what a troll is?

There’s no rest for the wicked. 

Your whole modus operandum is built around insult. Contemptuous.

In truth. No. Just another slur deployed by people whose armoury if facts was depleted ages ago. Read the FT piece and take a nap there’s a good lad. 

Look up the thread. I’m called a liar, stupid, spouting crap and tripe.. do I need to extend the list. You folks dole it out. Don’t expect to take the moral high ground without a bare knuckle fight. Sanctimonious fools. 

Do you perhaps mean contemptible? 

I made a simple point that the EU seriously failed in the Balkans. Nothing more. To me that is incontestable. And as such proves the point that the EU has not kept the peace in Europe. It has relied on others, notably the US and NATO to do that. 

If someone calls you a liar, address that. If they say you’re spouting crap, respond to them. Don’t assume that gives you carte blanche to insult everyone else you come across. I’m not in the habit of insulting you so don’t insult me. 

They haven't been as effective as they might have been on the Yemen, either. 

And your point is?

So not a fall in growth as I think you claimed. But a fall relative to a modelled estimate of what might have been. And not the source you claimed but a pro EU organisation that is described as independent. I can imagine what the response would have been if the boot had been on the other foot. I can’t be bothered to find the previous thread but your claims were deeply misleading. 

I will insult who I like. Or, more likely, dislike. Thanks for the sage advice. I have addressed it. By pointing out that you  and people like you by and large are rude beyond belief. So if you don’t like it, address it.

You must be confusing me with someone else. Not my style. I’m only rude, sometimes, about what people say. I don’t insult people. 

Do not feed the trolls.

Liberal and tolerant to a man. No wonder you think the arrogant unelected EU elite are  doing a great job. Cut from the same smug block. 

Funnily enough, just in the last couple of minutes, parliament here in Macedonia has just voted by a 2/3 majority (in a tight, emotive and contested session) to open the Constitution for changing the name of the country in order to secure a path to EU and NATO accession.  So this country (and all parties other than the tiny, rabidly pro-Kremlin ones agree) has a fairly clear idea of where their peace, security and prosperity lie - notwithstanding Mr Yates views of the '90s and early '00s in the Western Balkans. 

Do a search on what he does for a living. He's a dog whistler, an agitator. This is probably just some exercise. He's clearly not thick, he knows exactly how disingenuous and ridiculous his posts are. He makes lots of column inches on here which makes it look like his views are widely held on here. He knows he isn't going to change many minds, but for every thousand of us EU loving snowflakes that thinks he's just a pain in the arse, there might just be another budding Thomas Mair who will think he's great. His location, sensibilities and especially the interminable nature of some of his posts also suggest an association with Philip Davies. 

Ignore him and he'll go away. 

Having read the two articles on his profile, I have to say they are well written, intelligent and insightful.

Shame about the forum persona.

You sure it's the same person?

I see you missed the bit where the findings were in line with OBR perditions.  I even cut and pasted it into my reply. Reality is a bugger, isn’t it?

It perfectly fits my point. nato and the eu. It’s that partnership. Your problem is you are utterly intolerant of and blind to any criticism of the EU. Answer me this please, do you think the EU and it’s menber states were capable of dealing with the Balkan crisis on their own? Was there, even if only a small part, a sense that the EUs handling of this crisis made it worse rather than better. 

Wow. You really don’t like to debate or discuss. You have no idea who I am. Its typical of the intolerant view here to shut discussion down either by abuse and insult; personal attacks as above which you should withdraw if you had any decency. A few weeks back I almost threw in the towel because it got so bad. But then I thought why should I be intimidated and silenced by an ugly, censorious minority. Here’s just a sample from this thread; Don’t feed the trolls (whatever they are, a pejorative I assume); ignore him and he will go away; call him stupid, a moron, a retard; tell him he spouts crap, shit and tripe; claim to have dug up private information on me and use that to shut me up. It’s fascistic and nasty. That is why I am here. Not for any other reason than to keep a small candle burning for free speech and democracy against the tyranny of voices on here who would snuff it out. This thread began with a simple proposition. The EU failed Yugoslavia. It needed NATO and the US to restore peace and stability. The guy above talking about Macedonia says they now want to join EU and NATO, which proves my point, But he somehow contrives to argue it proves me wrong. While I agree I have little chance of persuading people locked in group think to see the other side, I am not going to be silenced by fanatical Scottish nationalists who hate the English while claiming to support multiculturalism. Ignore me all you will. But  I ain’t leaving the room. You’ll have to put up with the smell of crap and tripe for a good while yet. 

No I did not. The point is you claimed it was their report. It was not. It was CER. You either deliberately misattributed the source or were sloppy. Your cut and paste only proves that. Sorry George. But once again you are in the wrong side of truth

A new low. Why thank you Bobby. All I have done is point out the EU failed Yugoslavia. And needed the US and NATO to rescue them. I think that is beyond dispute. The reasons for peace inside the EU are many and various and should not all be attributed to the wisdom and statecraft of unelected Commissars. 

I can’t find your original post. Could you direct me to it? It’s on another thread. Thanks. PS how is the ‘arse raping’ business going? 

I'd be careful, the "project" might be research for an article based on responses to an agent provocateur which actually proves only that shitstirring raises responses but might be used to "prove" something else.

Yeah. Good thinking Cat Man. You guys are even more conspiracy minded than the leave loons. Yeah. Or it could just be that your arguments and grasp of the fundamentals are so poor that it’s a bit of a pheasant shoot. Either way, it’s only a ride

U ok hun? Heavy session or just misplaced your reading glasses?

More whit and insight. It’s why I come here so often. Thanks for being that ray of sunlight in a cold, cold world. X

It's 'wit'.

Anyway, I'm seriously interested - why ARE you so fanatical in your hatred of the EU? There's a very un-PC joke in one of the Rumpole books, where Rumpole is convinced a Judge's mother must have been raped by a black Guardian reading social worker, he was so angry whenever someone having one of those attributes came before him. What's your equivalent? 

I think you just proved my point. Bye.

Ah, a compliment ...

No conspirazydenken just thinking you expend so much time stirring it here that there must be summat innit fur dich

please feel free to share some SIGINT as I'll listen with interest

Why is it not possible to do understand there is nothing in it for me. I’m not even a masochist. I just think it’s important the remainer lies, half truths and deceptions that predominate here should not go unchallenged. No more. No less. It would be easier not to bother. And that is hugely attractive, but the gloating that followed my last valedictory address persuaded me to withdraw my notice to quit. X

I've never heard of 'throwing the toys back in the pram' before. 

It's actually rather more complex as different US administrations going back to Clinton at least at have had different approaches to whether the EU should be more of a security player, somewhat regardless to policies on NATO. NATO and the EU institutionally have gone through periods of trying to cooperate more closely and then moving away again. It's weird going to Brussels and seeing how institutionally difficult it is for say British diplomats or officers at NATO HQ and then British diplomats or eurocrats down the road in the EU institutions to actually talk to each other. It's a long time ago now but I remember doing interviews at NATO in the morning, then the same at Commission in the afternoon, with relatively senior people on the counter-terrorism desks who were asking me, a young think tank researcher just off the early flight from Helsinki, what the other institution was thinking!

Currently I think Trump has no real understanding of the EU at all, not actually a particular rare thing amongst even policy professionals in Washington, but that's why all his rhetoric is around NATO budgets. He sort of understands that and it fits with his victim-mentality.

Let's just hope they can manage to do more than just take the eu development money, unlike most other former Soviet block nations, who seem only willing to play ball when it relates to eu funds flowing into their country. 

The Macedonia issue, north , south, republic of etc..  are just problems that aren't likely to disappear. Some people are always going to be unhappy regardless of what name is used. 

I did wonder as you said you were a journalist. Were you based in Bosnia during those years?

It just seems that using the agony of the Bosnians and other Yugoslavs then seems a bit sad as a stick to beat the EU with now, particularly because - as you acknowledge - the EU wasn't at the time set up in a way that could deal with such a situation.

EU inaction is hardly on par with UN (and Dutch) paralysis over Srebrenica and the fall of "the safe area". I remember reading that one or two SAS were also on the ground there as forward air controllers and really really wanted to start killing Mladic's forces but met with UN and Dutch inaction and ultimately London pulled them out.

Forgive me. I was simply saying that Bosnia was not the EUs finest hour. And that those who claim the EU had kept the peace are wrong and fail to give due credit to the US and NATO. As with other crises - climate change, terror, migration - the EU core has a  habits of mobilising them to drive closer integration. Not something that I favour. I have just been reading the history of MT’s Bruges Speech, 80 plus percent of which was FCO rather than Number 10. Also the depressing piece in Prospect on FCO and Global Britain. I am not sanguine about leave. But even less about Remain. We cannot ignore 17 m. I have no idea if UKC is representative of Remain, but suspect it is, but if so, we are really in for a difficult period in our politics. The situation in other EU countries is significantly worse. I have no pony in this race but will continue to challenge the language, tactics and arrogance of Remain. 

You wouldn't be shadow boxing again, would you John?

Forgive me if I ignore you. 

People's Vote March today! It's uplifting don't you think?

That we have the freedom to march. Absolutely. That Parliament should decide. Absolutely. That the remainers are blind and deaf to 17m of their fellow citizens....on here at least, absolutely. 

Just remind us all John, exactly how many wars between EU member states have there been, since the the EU was formed?

As I asked someone else upthread, did the EU help or hinder the NI peace process?, I assume you read the question, though not asked directly of you, but I'd love to know your thoughts.

We all know the answer to that. But it’s a giant leap from that to say the EU is the cause of the peace. Even someone as narrow minded as you might consider, exhaustion from a war that left millions dead, the holocaust, the US commitment to rebuilding a shattered continent, the Marshall Plan, the Cold War, the stationing of NATO troops in their tens of thousands, the fear of nuclear threat, a bi-polar world, the engineering of the West German constitution, all these have had a part to play in securing peace. Only a fool would think it was all the work of the EU. Where the EU faced a test in Europe, in the Balkans especially it has failed that test. 

Love the irony that Lord Adonis is quoted as leader of the People’s Vote. Lord Adonis! Who voted for him? Widely described as war monger Blair’s enforcer. Never elected to office. Fits right in with the Commissars then. So wonderfully Orwellian to have an unelected fixer for Blair leading the People’s Vite. As Kelvin used to say, you couldn’t make it up. 

And, of course, no one has remotely hinted that thet think the EU solely responsible. 

I wasn't aware that he was "leader", isn't the People's Vote more of a movement? And as you've raised the subject - who is the leader of the Leave camp? It would appear they've all scuttled off back under their respective rocks..

That will be the Lord Adonis leader of the People’s Vote who went to the fee paying private school Kingham Hill before going up to Christ Church and then avoided the hassle of putting his candidacy for political office to the People’s vote by getting Tony B Liar to use the power of patronage to get him in the House of Lords. As he did with Charlie Falconer. Adonis. Blair. People’s Vote. You are having a laugh. Second referendum. It wouldn’t surprise me if he, and the majority of today’s marchers, opposed the first one! Inspired someone asked. Not by the content or the argument or the cause. But yes by the tolerance and freedom of expression that makes England such an attractive destination for those who value freedom of expression, the right of public protest, and the opportunity for toffs like Adonis to pretend they are men of the people. Is Mandelson involved in this sham too. Now that would be funny. 

I used  deliberate in this case as I wanted to emphasize your dishonesty rather than accepting that you could simply have been mistaken. But yes, strictly speaking you are correct and I'm happy to concede the point, just disappointed that you want to turn this into a semantic argument rather than answer my questions. 

Nor is it true that a significant number even claim as much, it's a straw man.

You were given the opportunity to put that right. What do you think the EU should have done about the Balkans specifically or in future in conflicts outwith EU borders?

Do you think the EU should act together as a military force?

Do you think the EU countries should adhere to a single foreign policy?

So to summarise:

The UK should leave the EU because it is a federal superstate with five unelected presidents.

The EU 'failed the test' in Bosnia because it is not a federal superstate with a military capable of forcing its will on neighbouring states.

It’s a summary of something. But what, I have no idea. I could summarise your summary in three words: clutching at straws. Are you on t’march? 

I think accuracy is important. 

What about the NI peace process. Did the EU help or hinder?

That is probably the most significant factor about peace in Europe since WW2.
Sod all to do with the EU.
 

Come now, read Andy’s very leading question. I love the entry on Andrew Adonis’s WiKi profile. The spokesman for the People’s Vote “assumed office” in May 2005. Such a brilliant word. Assumed office. No need for a People’s Vote when you assume office.  I’m sure many of the 17 million who voted leave assumed their wishes would be honoured. How wrong they were. Had I voted leave, I’d feel cheated and aggrieved. But heh, let’s get inspired by the People’s March. 

Ok, so as not to misrepresent you perhaps you could, for the third time of asking, answer the following questions:

What do you think the EU should have done about the Balkans specifically or in future in conflicts outwith EU borders?

Do you think the EU should act together as a military force?

Do you think the EU countries should adhere to a single foreign policy

No. The UK should leave the EU  UK because that is what the People’s Vote decided. We should honour that decision as John McDonnell says.

No. It failed because it was not fit for purpose. And was/is incompetent. The last thing anyone should want is to give the EU modern weaponry so they can, in your words, ‘force their will on neighbouring states.’ Good heavens Tommy that is terrifying. An EU armed to the teeth forcing its will on other states. Before long they’ll be  annexing the Sudetenland. 

In reply to Phantom Disliker

I wasn't aware that he was "leader", isn't the People's Vote more of a movement?

You wouldn’t be aware. You didn’t vote for him. You didn’t have the chance. No one ever has. Movement? As in bowel perhaps? 

Phew. Thanks. 

Poops! I think you might find a certain Senator George Mitchell might have had something to do with it. I think he’s an AMexican. Special envoy or something to Bill Clinton. Remember him? Could keep the Airforce One in its hangar? Well I even think he might have signed something called the Good Friday Agreement. But you can always do WiKi to find the truth. What I would say, and this could be a tad controversial given that I’ve already mentioned that it was an American got us out of the Irish swamp, is that the EU Commision use of the border issue in the Brexit talks is shameful. Senators Mitchell is unlikely to share that view; but if the EU did really care about peace it would not play playground politics with such an issue. As with Yugo I knew some of the players in the peace process at the time and though it is a long time ago and I am old I don’t recall the EC/EU playing a significant role. Maybe wrong. Seems I often am. 

Would agree. Your differences become less significant when you must unite against the ussr or in the current case Putin. Although some countries are not quite sure where put their loyalty, especially now you have Trump in the West. 

First question. It’s a book and more. What they got wrong and would need to avoid next time. They got the diplomacy wrong; they misunderstood the fissaporous nature of the state ( parallels here with Iraq post Saddam and Yugoslavia post Tito); little collaboration and intelligence sharing ( you don’t need EU for that); early interventions disastrous and set the place on fire; weakness in the face of Serb bullies; so much more and others far better qualified than me. Clear leadership and goals; domestic support for those goals; coalition partners bought in and prepared to share expertise, intelligence, troops and weapons; marshalled international agencies to bring factions together with convincing sanctions for non compliance. The no fly zone worked for these reasons. Upthread someone mentioned Mladic and SAS. My military sources say they kept him active for intel gathering. They wanted to know about his wider associates. When done they arrested. 

Second: No

Third: No 

Hope that helps. 

J

At last we have something we can all agree on.

For those of us unable to follow your prose, was that :

a) "the EU helped the peace process" or

b)"the EU hindered the peace process?

TIA

I've done a bit of research and nowhere can I find anything saying that Lord Adonis is leader of the People's Vote. Do you have a source?

Haha.

Do some more? Lots of news stories today quoting him. Perhaps he just stood out in the crowd and the media just lit upon Baron Adonis man of the people.  Ask him yourself

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/an-evening-with-andrew-adonis-tickets-515183...

Remainer bible lists him as one of the leaders. Chuck someone is the leader. 

PMSL.

You really are clueless.

"one of the leading voices of Remain" doesn't make him the leader does it?

Another tenuous source with obfuscation applied by yourself. I can't believe I was hoodwinked for a while. You're a charlatan mate, a snake oil salesman.

There’s garments you can get for that. Let me know if they work for you. 

He was one of the founders and is a leader, you wanna split hairs fine. But shit he’s in the media talking for the Peoplea Vote and on behalf of the campaign not you. 

Is he or is he not a leader and leading spokesman for the People’s Vote? 

I'm off out for a beer to toast today's march, have a good evening trolling.

https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/uk-exhausted-from-arguing-with-...

I've just done that very clever thing of bothering to look at Wikipedia, and see that Andrew Adonis - far from being a toff - was the son of a Cypriot waiter. He was placed in a council children's home until the age of 11, when he was awarded a local education authority grant to attend Kingham Hill School.

It looked a good do - did you bump into Baron Adonis and Delia on the marks -- will they be joining you for a beer? A mere fraction of those who voted to leave of course.... but heh, it was sunny and a chance to chant all those old anti-Tory slogans and to feel that warm glow of self-righteousness and being one of the good guys. Maggie, Maggie, Maggie......

He's the new aristocracy. His position of power is all about patronage and privilege..... Baron Adonis man of the people....you can believe it if it makes you feel better. But he's a Tony Croney in my book.....

I didn't attend the march (and never claimed to), you do have a knack for extrapolating what you want to believe out of writing that means something else entirely. So no beers with Andrew Adonis for me unfortunately, I do follow Gina Miller on Twitter though. I hope that helps.

Indeed, he's an impressive man. Only the mean spirited would fail to acknowledge his achievements, regardless of agreeing politically. Portraying him as a toff as Yates tried is deliberately dishonest. Again.

I hope it helps you. 

I haven't failed to acknowledge his achievements. The boy done well. But that doesn't take away from the wonderful irony that a former unelected government minister and Blair enforcer (academy schools and tuition fees) who was the beneficiary of political patronage is a leading light, founder and spokesman for the People's Vote campaign. Never once had a vote in his life.

I know there are lots of folk on here who admire Mr Blair, his foreign wars, fondness for celebrity, his adroit use of political patronage to elevate his chums to the unelected second chamber, the rise of academy schools and tuition fees, that I thought you would welcome me mentioning his sterling contribution to the People's Vote effort.  Let's hear it for the Baron. The people's champion. 

I was at school with Blair, unfortunately and think he's guilty of Acts of aggression and Crimes against Peace so hope that breaks your Sperry Gyroscope, together with the fact that I might be older than you so should also be spouting Brekshite.  I hate him for what he did to our country and Brexit is just as big a mistake, won't kill as many as Iraq and Afghan but it will hurt us more for longer

My guess is that john yates is john yates 55 i.e. he was born in 1955

Just watched Simon Reeves in Cyprus.  Possibly one of the most divided countries in the World.
3% of its area is buffer zone between the two sides.
EU peace keepers?  Ha.
No doubt Romtheknowitall will correct me otherwise.

What do you want the eu to do?

Eoka in 1950s so fifteen-twenty years before UK joined common market. 

1960 independence from uk

UN peacekeeping since 1964 so forty years before Cyprus joined EU.

Turkish invasion 1973 so thirty years before Cyprus joined EU.

Why would anybody expect the EU to be militarilly committed outside its borders in the late fifties, mid sixties or 1973?

Turkey might veto an EU force they might not regard as neutral due to Greek membership. Also permanent five on security council can veto any change.Hence no change but then UN force isn't broke so why fix it?

I'm certainly no expert on the area but it does seem to be a curious choice of example to demonstrate failure of EU to assure peaceful coexistence within its member countries, given that Cyprus appears to have been free from significant military conflict since broadly the inception of the EU.

I’m touched you care. Are you the chap who doesn’t know where Orgreave is? I sent a map and other details to refresh your memory. Looking forward to The Depot opening soon. I imagine it will be a great new facility for Sheffield don’t you? 

Thanks for that wonderful piece of authentic frontier gibberish (with apologies to Mel Brooks). 

This is a rather turgid abstract of a longer article. It paints a less flattering picture.

...local perceptions of the Union and its usefulness have affected its ability to manage the conflict. It argues that the EU undermined its own membership conditionality as a lever for the country's reunification through uncoordinated and mismanaged engagement in the pre-accession period. While the post-accession power balance shifted in favour of the Greek Cypriot community, neither side has been able to profit substantially from the new conditions. The post-accession status quo has led to widespread disillusionment with the realities of EU membership and is creating new resentments and antagonisms. EU membership for the Republic of Cyprus has given both protagonists the opportunity to use the Union to continue the dispute within a new ‘European’ rhetoric.

So. No resolution. New resentments and antagonisms. Not really peace. But not a hot war. Five out of ten? 

I'm actually feeling quite sorry for you, John.

It can't be nice feeling like you have any incentive to adopt such an online persona. And it must be even worse if you believe you're doing it out of personal choice.

I hope you find peace with whatever is gnawing away to make you feel you want to act this way.

I think Rom lives there, so he might have a reasonable idea what is going on!

There are many forms of condescension John and one is the presumption to be in the position to advise others without in the slightest way knowing them or caring about how that advice might be perceived. Go well.

17 m people live in Britain and voted leave. But Rom and his chums on here think they know diddly squat about what’s going on. I notice so many of the angriest remainer voices on here are not resident in the country they claim to care so much about. From Cyprus to Calgary the cry goes out to ignore or silence the voices from Cleethorpes to Cockermouth. 

43 million live in Britain and didn't, some because they didn't know - a legitimate reason- and many because they couldn't - the children who stand to inherit this omnishambles we have created.

In the name of all that's holy, why not have a vote on the final deal once it is known what that is? If the majority do vote for impoverishment, marginalisation and isolation then I for one will accept it.

A vote on the deal? Or a vote on in or out? Is your suggestion that we allow our children to vote? Four years olds maybe? I can see the attraction. Would make for a gentler kinder politics perhaps. Im more in favour of parliament voting on the deal. And utterly against another leave/stay referendum. if we vote the deal down, then its out and no deal.....is that what you are after? 

I've no intention of reading the whole thread but here are my thoughts.  To say the EU has kept the peace is a gross exaggeration.  It has of course made a contribution but equally it has done things that have endangered the peace, agitation in the ex soviet satellites and failures in the Balkans for example.  A number of factors have kept the peace:  a reduction in imperialistic empire building, a realisation that wars are expensive and achieve very little, a more enlightened population, advances in technology, less of a class system and perhaps above all else the acknowledgement of Mutually Assured Destruction.

Al

Thanks young man.

In a population of over 60 million, roughly 24 million will have an average IQ (+/-10pts), 18 million have an IQ over 110, and 18 million are Leave voters, 1 million of whom got lost on the way to the polling station.

I have no intention of reading your whole post so I'm just going to say, don't repeat the same lies john and Thomas spew.

I'm not aware or have any intention of lying, I've simply expressed my own views.  If they are at odds with yours there is nothing I can do about that. it doesn't make them lies.

Then I'll ask you the same as I asked earlier (in the thread you can't be arsed to read), who is claiming the eu has kept the peace outwith its borders.

It certainly would be if anyone was claiming that. Pointing out that the idea of war between member states now seems inconceivable is not the same thing, nor is pointing out that increased cooperation between nations is likely to reduce conflict between them. 

So we're guilty of intervening too much in ex-soviet states but not enough in the Balkans? You're going to have to enlighten me on what this agitation is because apart from some sanctions directed at Russia in response to them quasi-invading Ukraine and shooting down a civilian jet I don't see a lot.

Silly me.  There I was thinking it was the title of the post.

... and therein lies My Yates' modus operandi: fabricate a claim that nobody's really making and then try to sound clever by demolishing it.

It does in the eyes of the true believers. You need a thick skin and big heart to keep plugging away with this lot. Arrogant Arran will be coming up shortly no doubt with some snide aside. 

'kin hell! There should be a prize for a post that stupid! It's true because it's in the thread title? 

GridNorth onsights E8!

GridNorth solos Kanshung face!

GridNorth brings world peace!

All true, I've said 'em.

It's one thing not to read the whole thread, it's another to not even bother to read the first thread. To save you the bother here's what happened. John Yates starts a post to refute a claim no one made, everyone else shrugged and said "no one made that claim", John Yates repeates ad naseum, everyone wonders why we bother with this shit then you come along and also refute a claim no one made. 

Oh and just on cue -- here he is with another witty aside.

So John, ' fabricate a claim that nobody's really making and then try to sound clever by demolishing it'

No one making the claim the EU keeps the peace.

Perhaps your memory failed you. Think back to six years. I know its a long time. But in 2012 Yr the EU was awarded the Nobel Prize

There is an article in the New Statesman that discusses it under the heading How valid is the claim that the EU has delivered peace in Europe? 

If you are not washing dishes at Chez Arran you can read it here; or perhaps look at before retiring for the night.

https://bit.ly/2q5dApd

The same prominently pro-Remain paper says:'Now, the Remain campaign point to the attainment of peace in Europe as one if its highest ranking achievements.'

Still think it is a claim I fabricated? 

Still think it is a claim no one is making?

Doesn't the title of the NS just give you a shadow of doubt?

The thought that you might be wrong?

We also have David Cameron, pro remain, pointing out that before the EU its member states were at ‘each others’ throats’  but now lived and worked together for peace.

Fabricated? You sure?

And my point on the Balkans failure that has provoked such venom on this site. Here is what the New Statesman has to say:

'Ever since the Balkan wars after 1991, the EU has been accused of impotence in resolving conflict. Time and again, it has been seemingly incapable of intervening in a coordinated and effective way. The Former Yugoslavia disintegrated into chaos right under its nose.'

The author adds:

"It has performed little better in the ..the Ukraine. Or with the Russian annexation of Crimea. Sanctions may be imposed, diplomatic measures applied, but they’re often muted. Too frequently for some commentators, the economic weight of the EU has counted for nothing when faced with intractable conflicts around the world.'

And to those who tried, unsuccessfully to pretend that the EU has no role beyond its borders, why has it a budget of $300m that it is spending in 80 countries far from its own borders?

For me the biggest failure -- alongside Bosnia -- is the immigration crisis. Why? Because it was an ideologically driven policy implemented with little or no thought to its consequences.

The result, inside the EU, is that the very EU itself is threatened.

One of its biggest and most powerful members is leaving.

Others might follow. The far right is on the march across the continent.  

Keeping the peace? Really Mr Arran. 

The author of the New Statesman piece by the way is Andrew Williams. Lacuna's editor-in-chief, he teaches law and creative writing at the University of Warwick. He won the George Orwell Prize for Political Writing in 2013. I doubt he is a leaver. 

Please see response to Mr Arran and share some humble pie with him if you have the stomach.

Dear me, at least you guys are equal opportunity thugs and bullies to everyone you disagree with .

It would be good if you could raise yourself to bother. Remain -- see below -- has consistently argued that the EU keeps the peace. The idea that no one is saying this is risible. In 2012 the EU  was actually awarded the Nobel Peace prize. Maybe you didn't get an invite, or were on march at the time to stop whatever it is that needed stopping ...Here is what the citation said:

The EU’s most important achievement, according to the committee, has been "the successful struggle for peace and reconciliation and for democracy and human rights".

See the New Statesmen for a rather less sanguine view of the EU record on peace and human rights. 

But, for heavens sake, stop being so abusive; and open yourself up to a different viewpoint. Calling GridNorth a liar because he doesn't agree with the remainer thugs on here is just ill manners. 

Either you are pig ignorant or deeply devious. Here is what I said - it is all in the first sentence so you don't have to break off from your Beastmaker routine too long... It is often claimed that one of the many benefits of the EU is that it has kept the peace in continental Europe. 

I do not say that people on this site have made the claim. Though they have. It is just that I cant be bothered wading through the torrent of 'shit' as you so quaintly put it that comes my way every time I have the temerity to question the wisdom of the remainer herd...

Here is what the New Statesman...that rabid leaver rag asked a little while back....

How valid is the claim that the EU has delivered peace in Europe?For many arguing that the UK should remain in the EU, the first and foremost claim is that it is a force for peace

So I am making this 'shit' up. 

You can see my reply to another blinkered, arrogant soul above. Either you guys are lazy, dumb or duplicitous. You really should join leave -- you'd get along just dandy. 

I shouldn't really bother reply information to this but incase GridNorth (who I've no desire to offend) reads the above and once again takes what you've written at face value I think I should point out that in neither of my replies to him did I call him a liar. As for the abusive and thug comments, your paranoia is showing through.

??????Who's making the claim? Or are you accepting it's true because the New Statesman says so? Journalists, tsk, can't believe a word.

Agree you did not call Grid North a liar -- and apologies for implying that was the case .....I think it might have been sir chasm? ...the truth is you folk all sound so poisonous and nasty that you blur in to one.....also you have not in any way addressed the fact that my own comments have been distorted by you...but that is to be expected. You always play the man and not the issue....I'm not waiting up. 

Clicking the link might help. 

That's an awful lot of words to not add anything substantive to your OP.

Better than a lot of awful words heh John.

Thank you

So just just to get this straight, we need to ditch the EU because it failed at something you agree it wasn’t supposed to do?  That makes about as much sense as getting rid of my toaster because it’s sh*t at walking the dog.

Oi! I drive a taxi and from your posts we seem to be fairly close in opinion on a lot of things. 

Tusk said that very thing today, Farage laughed at him ( loudly) , and gave reasons.