The Eu withdrawal is a mess because of the EU

Status
Not open for further replies.
Where would I be missing the point?

The fact you dont want to venture an opinion on the EUs attitude to Africa trade? or you dont care about it?


If you can't understand why you are missing the point, then that's fair enough.

But don't expect any response from me until you can address the issue (an issue you thought you had the rights to). It's a little deeper than your original overall glib points.
 
Sponsored Links
I find it hilarious now that quitters are criticising the EU trade with Africa as they scrape the barrel for reasons to justify their decision to leave. Using this absurd logic then you should criticise anyone who doesn't have a free trade deal with Africa or are you saying you will be signing free trade deals with African nations post brexit?

Well it seems Africa are intent on copying the EU in creating their own Free Trade area amongst 44 countries of the African Union. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Continental_Free_Trade_Agreement

You couldnt make it up. :LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
But you haven't thus far put forward any relevant valid points!

All you've shown is your inability to understand that the 'deal' that camoron got was merely reinforcing the status quo - something quitters didn't (and still don't) understand!

Can I, in your words, 'dumb that down any more'?

If you get a deal/concession, in the case of Cameron, to distance ourselves from greater ties to the EU, how is that reinforcing the 'status quo', when the point of the EU is the absolute opposite.

Secondly that was never the point I made but by constantly quoting the Cameron deal you've been doing the legwork for me; the concessions agreed were irrelevant to my point, the fact that they were agreed upon was all that was important but you failed to see that.

My point again was, if you thought a remain vote would mean business as usual you would have been wrong.

The fact you were quoting the sovereignty concession confirms that; membership as was pre-referendum would not have remained the same post referendum even with a remain majority.

Strawman attempts are feeble but common from a biased, blinkered remainer.
 
Strawman attempts are feeble but common from a biased, blinkered remainer.
There were no concessions, it was simply re-stating the status quo...
There were no concessions, it was simply re-stating the status quo...
There were no concessions, it was simply re-stating the status quo...

How many times does it need to be repeated?

But hey, quitters obviously still don't get it and are too busy 'high fiving' themselves to realise the consequences of their ignorance!

membership as was pre-referendum would not have remained the same post referendum even with a remain majority.
Again, show us proof of this claim!
 
Sponsored Links
The fact that Cameron sat down for weeks with the EU and re-negotiated the terms of our membership... You quoted one of the agreed terms!
Nope, the 'agreed terms' were simply recognition of the UK's allowed opt-outs!

I bet you still think we couldn't have limited immigration under existing rules either :rolleyes:

So again, show us the proof of what you claim.

Because what you believe and reality are poles apart!
 
Nope, the 'agreed terms' were simply recognition of the UK's allowed opt-outs!


You've just said it yourself yet you keep babbling, the EU were willing to give concessions based on a 'remain' vote. That doesn't mean our membership would have remained as it was.

Opt outs=/=business as usual.
 
bet you still think we couldn't have limited immigration under existing rules either :rolleyes:

What you believe and reality are poles apart!
What you believe the EU is capable of and reality and poles apart too.
 
What you believe the EU is capable of and reality and poles apart too.
So what do you think the US and China are 'capable of' when we have to go cap in hand to them?

I'm perfectly aware of what reality is - quitters are not!
 
Again, give us proof...

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat your 'belief', it still doesn't make it true!

I don't know how you can keep asking for proof when the fact terms were re-negotiated for continued membership means change. Are you simple?
 
I don't know how you can keep asking for proof when the fact terms were re-negotiated for continued membership means change. Are you simple?
So if you have those 'facts', I'm just asking for the following from you...

Give us the proof that if there had been a remain result, the UK would have had to renegotiate it's membership of the EU, as you have claimed...

Surely that's 'simple' enough for you to produce evidence for us to see?

And whilst you're about it maybe you could also tell us why/how the EU would have been able to 'put us in the eurozone and have a completely open port with the Schengen zone' as you also believe?

Go on...Break the habit, and back up your argument with proof!
 
My point again was, if you thought a remain vote would mean business as usual you would have been wrong.
I thought voting remain meant the continuation of the EU dynamic whether that be any new rules/changes/agreements or carrying on with the old ones.

What is your take on it? Try and be honest.(y)
 
I thought voting remain meant the continuation of the EU dynamic whether that be any new rules/changes/agreements or carrying on with the old ones.
And more to the point, being able to shape/approve/veto any such new rules/changes/agreements...

Just as we shaped/approved the mechanism of leaving the EU...

Something the quitters conveniently want to forget!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top