http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ean-Union.html

On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 09:32:34 -0700, harry wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...1679048/Nigel-
Farage-It-is-bonkers-to-stay-in-the-European-Union.html

He's not wrong!

harry wrote

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ean-Union.html

Clearly **** all of the voters agree with him given that only 12% were
actually stupid enough to vote UKIP.

If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?
I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in. To me the
Currency union experiment has failed, and to some extent so have other
unification initiatives, but at some level the system can and does work so
fight the beaurocracy and corruption certainly, but don't throw the baby
out with the bathwater.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"harry" wrote in message
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ean-Union.html

On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there wont
be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be there
fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Not to say some form of EU wide political talking shop might not be
relevant - we've had NATO for years of course - but this EU is abiout as
relevant today as the Socialist workers party.


To me the
Currency union experiment has failed, and to some extent so have other
unification initiatives, but at some level the system can and does work so
fight the beaurocracy and corruption certainly, but don't throw the baby
out with the bathwater.

Unfortunately the baby and the bathwater are indissoluble.

"I could save my marriage if only my wife was a better person"

Unfortunately, she isn't., which is why you called in the lawyers...



Brian



--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

Brian-Gaff wrote

If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Forever. Neither Norway nor Switzerland has ever been at war with
a EU country and Britain will still be in NATO even if it leaves the EU.

I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Norway and Switzerland clearly feel otherwise and do well anyway.

To me the Currency union experiment has failed,

Doesn’t explain why operations like the US work fine.

and to some extent so have other unification initiatives,

Yes, there are some real downsides, particularly with the
more wealthy countries subsidising the poorer ones.

but at some level the system can and does work

Yes, in some ways it works a lot better no
EU, particularly on the free trade area alone.

so fight the beaurocracy and corruption certainly,

Easier said than done tho, particularly as the european
parliament doesn’t even get to initiate legislation.

but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

That is basically what Cameron is attempting, trying to monster
the EU into doing things better to get Britain to stay. It will be
interesting to see if he gets any concessions.

"harry" wrote in message
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ean-Union.html

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there wont
be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be there
fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

Not to say some form of EU wide political talking shop might not be
relevant - we've had NATO for years of course - but this EU is abiout as
relevant today as the Socialist workers party.

Bet the voters feel otherwise.


To me the
Currency union experiment has failed, and to some extent so have other
unification initiatives, but at some level the system can and does work
so
fight the beaurocracy and corruption certainly, but don't throw the baby
out with the bathwater.

Unfortunately the baby and the bathwater are indissoluble.

"I could save my marriage if only my wife was a better person"

Unfortunately, she isn't., which is why you called in the lawyers...

Bet the voters feel otherwise.

On 18/06/15 08:57, John Chance wrote:
Brian-Gaff wrote

If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Forever. Neither Norway nor Switzerland has ever been at war with
a EU country and Britain will still be in NATO even if it leaves the EU.

I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we
stand a better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Norway and Switzerland clearly feel otherwise and do well anyway.

To me the Currency union experiment has failed,

Doesnt explain why operations like the US work fine.

They don't work fine, and the USA is a federation, not a union:
individual states ahve oft5en more power to klegislate than a EU country.


If e.g. Missisippi could leave the dollar area it might not be the
backward ******** that it is.


The problem with a single currency is that it more or less enforces a
single economic policy and that is not what you need when regions are in
very different economic states, have very different economic activities
and are in different parts of economic cycles.



and to some extent so have other unification initiatives,

Yes, there are some real downsides, particularly with the
more wealthy countries subsidising the poorer ones.

but at some level the system can and does work

Yes, in some ways it works a lot better no
EU, particularly on the free trade area alone.

so fight the beaurocracy and corruption certainly,

Easier said than done tho, particularly as the european
parliament doesnt even get to initiate legislation.

but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

That is basically what Cameron is attempting, trying to monster
the EU into doing things better to get Britain to stay. It will be
interesting to see if he gets any concessions.


I don't think its possible: For the EU to admit that 'ever closer
unio9n' rather than 'federation' is a bad way to go spells the de facto
end of the EU anyway.


And it would be incompatible with its structure. The EU is not a
flexible adaptable fedreartion - it is a rigid dirigiste organisation.

It will fail before it changes.


"harry" wrote in message
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ean-Union.html





--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 09:00:51 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there wont
be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be there
fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

Has any country been given the chance ?


Not to say some form of EU wide political talking shop might not be
relevant - we've had NATO for years of course - but this EU is abiout as
relevant today as the Socialist workers party.

Bet the voters feel otherwise.

When was the last time the voters got a chance to vote ?

About the same time football supporters voted for FIFA.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:57, John Chance wrote:
Brian-Gaff wrote

If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Forever. Neither Norway nor Switzerland has ever been at war with
a EU country and Britain will still be in NATO even if it leaves the EU.

I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we
stand a better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Norway and Switzerland clearly feel otherwise and do well anyway.

To me the Currency union experiment has failed,

Doesnt explain why operations like the US work fine.

They don't work fine,

Common currency wise, they do. So does Britain.

and the USA is a federation, not a union:

Irrelevant to whether a common currency works fine, and for Britain.

individual states ahve oft5en more power to klegislate than a EU country.

Bull****.

If e.g. Missisippi could leave the dollar area it might not be the
backward ******** that it is.

Just as true of the dregs of Britain.

The problem with a single currency is that it more or less enforces a
single economic policy and that is not what you need when regions are in
very different economic states, have very different economic activities
and are in different parts of economic cycles.

Still works reasonably well in Britain.

and to some extent so have other unification initiatives,

Yes, there are some real downsides, particularly with the
more wealthy countries subsidising the poorer ones.

but at some level the system can and does work

Yes, in some ways it works a lot better no
EU, particularly on the free trade area alone.

so fight the beaurocracy and corruption certainly,

Easier said than done tho, particularly as the european
parliament doesnt even get to initiate legislation.

but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

That is basically what Cameron is attempting, trying to monster
the EU into doing things better to get Britain to stay. It will be
interesting to see if he gets any concessions.

I don't think its possible:

It clearly did with Scotland and Britain, for the Scots.

For the EU to admit that 'ever closer unio9n' rather than 'federation'

That isn't what the EU is about.

is a bad way to go spells the de facto end of the EU anyway.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

And it would be incompatible with its structure. The EU is not a flexible
adaptable fedreartion - it is a rigid dirigiste organisation.

It will fail before it changes.

It has already changed a hell of a lot from where
it started and no country has chosen to leave.

Britain won't either, you watch.

"harry" wrote in message
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ean-Union.html

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 09:58:50 UTC+1, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Brian-Gaff
wrote:

If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Much longer than if we stay in.

I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in. To me the
Currency union experiment has failed,

Yes.

and to some extent so have other unification initiatives,

Yes.

but at some level the system can and does work so fight the bureaucracy
and corruption certainly,

The bureaucracy is in charge. To get rid of it would mean, at a
minimum, getting rid of the Commission. No chance of that.

but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

This presupposes that there *is* a baby.

what if the baby keeps ****ing will it be still classed as bath water ?
or do we changed terminology to suite the facts.

In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

--
*If you think this van is dirty, you should try having sex with the driver*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 09:00:51 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there
wont
be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be there
fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

Has any country been given the chance ?

They don't have to be given anything, they are free to leave any time they
like.

Not to say some form of EU wide political talking shop might not be
relevant - we've had NATO for years of course - but this EU is abiout
as
relevant today as the Socialist workers party.

Bet the voters feel otherwise.

When was the last time the voters got a chance to vote ?

They will, you watch.

About the same time football supporters voted for FIFA.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

I doubt it.

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 11:21:39 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 09:00:51 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there
wont
be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be there
fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

Has any country been given the chance ?

They don't have to be given anything, they are free to leave any time they
like.

Who are the they here. Which counties have had a vote on whether they stay on or out of the EU.



Not to say some form of EU wide political talking shop might not be
relevant - we've had NATO for years of course - but this EU is abiout
as
relevant today as the Socialist workers party.

Bet the voters feel otherwise.

When was the last time the voters got a chance to vote ?

They will, you watch.

Just like the vote to use their mobiles while driving and smoke and drink.



About the same time football supporters voted for FIFA.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 11:21:39 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 09:00:51 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an
EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there
wont
be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that
we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be
there
fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

Has any country been given the chance ?

They don't have to be given anything, they are free to leave any time
they
like.

Who are the they here.

The country that has decided that it wants to leave.

Which counties have had a vote on whether they stay on or out of the EU.

None yet, because few have even wanted to leave.

Not to say some form of EU wide political talking shop might not be
relevant - we've had NATO for years of course - but this EU is
abiout
as
relevant today as the Socialist workers party.

Bet the voters feel otherwise.

When was the last time the voters got a chance to vote ?

They will, you watch.

Just like the vote to use their mobiles while driving and smoke and drink.

Nothing like in fact. You should have noticed that Scotland just voted
on whether they should leave Britain or not.

About the same time football supporters voted for FIFA.

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 12:23:08 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 11:21:39 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 09:00:51 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an
EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there
wont
be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that
we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be
there
fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

Has any country been given the chance ?

They don't have to be given anything, they are free to leave any time
they
like.

Who are the they here.

The country that has decided that it wants to leave.

Which counties have had a vote on whether they stay on or out of the EU.

None yet, because few have even wanted to leave.

And those that wanted to leave when did they get the vote.


Not to say some form of EU wide political talking shop might not be
relevant - we've had NATO for years of course - but this EU is
abiout
as
relevant today as the Socialist workers party.

Bet the voters feel otherwise.

When was the last time the voters got a chance to vote ?

They will, you watch.

Just like the vote to use their mobiles while driving and smoke and drink.

Nothing like in fact. You should have noticed that Scotland just voted
on whether they should leave Britain or not.

Yes they got the vote when did Britain get a chance on whether to leave the EU or not ? what date was it ?


About the same time football supporters voted for FIFA.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

I doubt it.

As a matter of interest,is there any logic to what name you post under? In
the same thread?

--
*Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

You're speaking for others. Again. It is impossible to guess 'what the
people want'

With any law or regulation, there will always be some in favour of it and
some not.

Take the standardisation of mains flex colours - to get back to DIY.
Plenty objected to it on principle, and some still do years after the
event. Yet the logic of implementing it should be obvious to all.

--
*24 hours in a day ... 24 beers in a case ... coincidence? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

You're speaking for others. Again. It is impossible to guess 'what the
people want'

With any law or regulation, there will always be some in favour of it and
some not.

Take the standardisation of mains flex colours - to get back to DIY.
Plenty objected to it on principle, and some still do years after the
event. Yet the logic of implementing it should be obvious to all.

the same logic did not apply to fixed wiring.

--
Please note new email address:

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 14:02:46 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

You're speaking for others. Again. It is impossible to guess 'what the
people want'

Not sure that really matters.

With any law or regulation, there will always be some in favour of it and
some not.

Sopme of which will have particular reasons. As below why bother with fuses. they only blow then you have the hassle of changing them.

Take the standardisation of mains flex colours - to get back to DIY.
Plenty objected to it on principle, and some still do years after the
event. Yet the logic of implementing it should be obvious to all.

So what do we in the UK have to have fused plugs, yet in france plugs aren't fused and they use a point to point system and we use a 'ring'.

I don;t think Germany make as much fuss as we do about putting the fuse in the 'live' wire, they don't seem to bother with fuses either.
and how can Germany have plugs were you can touch the 'live'

I'm suprised Europe haven't told us to scrap all our safety features,
after all standidisation is standardisation ask Apple ;-)

In article ,
charles wrote:
Take the standardisation of mains flex colours - to get back to DIY.
Plenty objected to it on principle, and some still do years after the
event. Yet the logic of implementing it should be obvious to all.

the same logic did not apply to fixed wiring.

Please explain the logic of having different colours for fixed wiring and
flex?

--
*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

You're speaking for others. Again. It is impossible to guess 'what the
people want'

Not sure that really matters.

Of course it does.

Backing up any argument by an unsubstantiated claim simply makes it less
true.

--
*America is so advanced that even the chairs are electric.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 15:43:00 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

You're speaking for others. Again. It is impossible to guess 'what the
people want'

Not sure that really matters.

Of course it does.

To who. Even though I disagree with UKIP they got around 10% of the vote but only 1 MP. How is that what the people want.
anyway if there's no vote on europe, then that proves it doesn;t matter what the people want.

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Take the standardisation of mains flex colours - to get back to DIY.
Plenty objected to it on principle, and some still do years after the
event. Yet the logic of implementing it should be obvious to all.

the same logic did not apply to fixed wiring.

Please explain the logic of having different colours for fixed wiring and
flex?

The two do not normally meet unless you are an electrician. In an existing
installation which has "new wiring", black might be neutral or it might be
a phase colour.

--
Please note new email address:

In article ,
charles wrote:
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Take the standardisation of mains flex colours - to get back to DIY.
Plenty objected to it on principle, and some still do years after the
event. Yet the logic of implementing it should be obvious to all.

the same logic did not apply to fixed wiring.

Please explain the logic of having different colours for fixed wiring
and flex?

The two do not normally meet unless you are an electrician. In an
existing installation which has "new wiring", black might be neutral or
it might be a phase colour.

If doing any work on such an installation - even DIY - you'd hopefully
know. It's hardly rocket science. Or leave it to one who does.

You could equally well come across an old flex not using the current
colours.

--
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

Not a chance. The EU doesnt even have any military forces at all.

Or a KGB or gulags either.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 12:23:08 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 11:21:39 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 09:00:51 UTC+1, John Chance wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with
an
EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least
there
wont
be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel
that
we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be
there
fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

Has any country been given the chance ?

They don't have to be given anything, they are free to leave any time
they
like.

Who are the they here.

The country that has decided that it wants to leave.

Which counties have had a vote on whether they stay on or out of the
EU.

None yet, because few have even wanted to leave.

And those that wanted to leave

None did.

when did they get the vote.

Not to say some form of EU wide political talking shop might not
be
relevant - we've had NATO for years of course - but this EU is
abiout
as
relevant today as the Socialist workers party.

Bet the voters feel otherwise.

When was the last time the voters got a chance to vote ?

They will, you watch.

Just like the vote to use their mobiles while driving and smoke and
drink.

Nothing like in fact. You should have noticed that Scotland just voted
on whether they should leave Britain or not.

Yes they got the vote when did Britain get a chance on whether to leave
the EU or not ? what date was it ?

Hasn't happened yet.

About the same time football supporters voted for FIFA.

On 18/06/15 09:00, John Chance wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there
wont be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be
there fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

No one left the titanic for a while either




--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On 18/06/15 11:21, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.


You just made that up didn't you?

Its a totally utterly absurd statement.




--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On 18/06/15 13:47, charles wrote:

I pretty sure Japan wasn't in Europe (WW2) and I'm not sure about Turkey
(WW1)


Japan was involved in a totally separate war, over a pacific empire



--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On 18/06/15 15:39, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

You're speaking for others. Again. It is impossible to guess 'what the
people want'

Not sure that really matters.

Of course it does.

Backing up any argument by an unsubstantiated claim simply makes it less
true.

Well you would know...


--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

In article , John Chance
writes


"Tim Streater" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an
EU country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

Not a chance. The EU doesnt even have any military forces at all.

But they want some.
Or a KGB or gulags either.

--
bert

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 09:00, John Chance wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 08:03, Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

About 10,000 years?

There are no EU countries, only regions, anyway - or at least there
wont be for much longer.


I'm not saying the EU is in any way perfect, but I do feel that we
stand a
better chance of affecting things for the better if we stay in.

Yerah if we all man te pumps teh deckhairs on te titamnic will be
there fir another 20 minutes.

Me?

I'm for the lifeboats.

The EU is dead. It just hasn't quite accepted it.

Odd that no country has chosen to leave.

No one left the titanic for a while either

Lot harder to successfully leave the titanic.

Trivially easy to leave the EU if you want to.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/06/15 13:47, charles wrote:

I pretty sure Japan wasn't in Europe (WW2) and I'm not sure about Turkey
(WW1)


Japan was involved in a totally separate war,

No it was not given that so much of it
involved the european colonies in asia.

over a pacific empire

And the germans were attempting a european empire.

And the original claim was that WW2 was a european civil war.

It was in fact nothing like that.

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , John Chance
writes


"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Brian-Gaff wrote:
If we take our ball and go, how long before we are at war with an EU
country?

Worrying thing is that's probably what a substantial number of
EuroSceptics want.

No, it's what Europe will *get* since the Euro-bigwigs are determined
to enforce their vision of Europe and **** to what the people want.

Not a chance. The EU doesnt even have any military forces at all.

But they want some.

Doesnt matter what they want, they won't get any, you watch.

Or a KGB or gulags either.

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , John Chance
wrote:

And the original claim was that WW2 was a european civil war.

It was in fact nothing like that.

You are a dumbcluck aren't you.

We'll see...

All these Europhiles sob loudy when
that bit of Beethoven is played, they stand up and put their right hand
over their left tit. In short, they think Europe is now one country.

They in fact think nothing of the sort.

And even you should have noticed that both Japan and
the US were actually quite heavily involved in WW2 and
that neither of those countries were part of europe.

So any falling out in Europe is going to be a European civil war.

Not when it involves Japan and the US.

I was
merely pointing out that we've had a number of these in recent times,

WW2 wasnt a civil war. We have different words for a reason.

and they way the Europhiles are going will make another *more* likely,
not *less*.

Fantasy.

You want peace and security in Europe?

We have that. There won't be another war in western europe, you watch.

Then let's go back to a free
trade arrangement, with agreements freely entered into by the *people*
in referendums

How odd that that was the situation which produced two world wars
and quite a few wars before that in europe. And not one since the EU
was established.

- an end to this "ever closer union" **** and the
abolition of the Commission and the European "Parliament".

That isn't going to produce peace and security in Europe.

Even you should have noticed that the most recent wars
in europe happened in countries which were not in the EU.

On 20/06/15 11:45, John Chance wrote:
Then let's go back to a free
trade arrangement, with agreements freely entered into by the *people*
in referendums

How odd that that was the situation which produced two world wars
and quite a few wars before that in europe. And not one since the EU
was established.

Actually it was the situation that daffiodils are yellow, that produced
WWI and WWII.

No I am wrong, it was the lack of decent contraception.

No, it wasn't that, it was the lack of education in the working classes.

No, it wasn't that, it was that God was dead.

JE- ****ing - SUS you are absolutely INSANE if you think that a simple
political and trade arrangement that was inevitable at that time was
anything to do more than anything else with WWII.

WWII happened because it could, and because people who were in positions
to start or stop it chose to start it, for a variety of reasons. For
Germany, and for Japan, it was the end game of a process of trying to
come to terms with the 19th and 20th century expansion of Western
civilisation:

Ultimately it was pure competition for resources for both.

Without WWII Germany would have been what Greece is now. They stole
immense wealth from Greece, which was never repaid, lost the war and
wiped out their debts. They also carried out enough ethnic cleansing to
ensure that Germany became a post war monoculture stripped of all diversity.

And used other peoples money to rebuild their industrial base whilst
Britain and France spent more than they could afford to protect them
from the Russians.



--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Without WWII Germany would have been what Greece is now. They stole
immense wealth from Greece, which was never repaid, lost the war and
wiped out their debts. They also carried out enough ethnic cleansing to
ensure that Germany became a post war monoculture stripped of all
diversity.

And used other peoples money to rebuild their industrial base whilst
Britain and France spent more than they could afford to protect them
from the Russians.

Even more bitter than usual.

WW2 finished some 70 years ago. Isn't it time you got over it?

--
*The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 20/06/15 13:51, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Without WWII Germany would have been what Greece is now. They stole
immense wealth from Greece, which was never repaid, lost the war and
wiped out their debts. They also carried out enough ethnic cleansing to
ensure that Germany became a post war monoculture stripped of all
diversity.

And used other peoples money to rebuild their industrial base whilst
Britain and France spent more than they could afford to protect them
from the Russians.

Even more bitter than usual.

WW2 finished some 70 years ago. Isn't it time you got over it?

I did not raise the subject.

Some remarked the EU would prevent WWII. I pointed out it had nothig to
do with it.

I am not sure where you get 'bitter' from. That is a factual account of
several aspects of WWII and its aftermath..

What particular fact do you dispute is true?



--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.