It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Indeed DC...that's not going to happen.
Every passing day it seems the likeliest to happen will be a No Deal Brexit.
That's what i'm thinking as well.
Isn't the consensus that Theresa May's cabinet won't allow that to happen. It's almost certain Parliament will do everything in it's power to stop that occurring.
Wouldn't the inevitable result be Parliament deciding to revoke Article 50 due to the impasse. No Brexit.
But then they would have directly over-ruled the people of the UK after a referendum,the whole government would have to resign before it collapsed due to 'no confidence',not just from fellow MP's but the nation itself.
Theresa May's cabinet is also refusing to revoke Article 50, so what can they do? She can't be voted out by her own Party, the opposition doesn't have a majority big enough to remove her from office. Unless she resigns, No Deal Brexit is getting very likely.
Plus there's the EU. No deal is the worst of all resolutions, but the clock is ticking dramatically.
I think we will leave and that it will be some cruddy compromise based on May's deal. It will suck. No one will be happy. We will be one foot in, one foot out of the EU.
Europe will continue to dominate political debate for years to come (hardly surprising since the UK is a key European player).
May be in a few years the momentum will build to rejoin.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/10/david-cameron-stay-as-pm-if-i-lose-eu-referendum
Highly doubt it. Since you would now be rejoining the UE post-2002, it means the UK cannot rejoin without implementing the Euro currency.
Possibile. In Italy for example there was a lot of talk about leaving the Euro during the last presidential campaign who saw a massive debacle of all the pro EU parties.
Quite frankly, I can see why people object to letting everyone vote until the results show the desired outcome. But in this case, it should be remembered that 41 years earlier a two-thirds majority voted to join. Why not leave that untouched as well? Or what should be the minimum period of grace for asking again? There has been this joke about George W. Bush during his tenure: He says the same thing on Wednesday that he said on Monday, no matter what happened on Tuesday. Isn't something extraordinary happening on Tuesday enough reason to re-think your position, starting Wednesday? Including the realisation that the promises made by one faction were obvious lies pandering to the feeble-minded racists and egomaniacs, and nothing more?
But then, here we have the general problem with referenda (or is it referendums?). The general constituency are far more easily deluded than an elected body. And that is why parliament should never be allowed to surrender its powers - and obligation - of coming to a decision based on research and facts, instead of listening to an ad-hoc narrow referendum majority. And an issue that amounts to a decision of major constitutional proportions should never be decided by a simple majority, but should require at least a two-thirds or 75-percent majority - or it might be reversed the next week. Especially if the original decision to join was in fact supported by 67 per cent, which should at least be overridden by the same margin.
But enjoy the revival of your Empire and Splendid Isolation (especially of the Continent when there's fog on the Channel).
There are lots of leavers in the UK who would like to think this is true but the fact is if the EU didn't already exist then Europe would be working to make it happen.
The peace and prosperity the EU (and NATO) has brought to Europe is unparalleled. People forget that before the EU was created Europe (which includes the UK) had never seen such a prolonged period without war.
Yes the EU may change, as it has done since the start, but the idea it's going to disappear is wishful thinking by it's enemies.
Milton Friedman gave the Euro 10 years before it collapsed but it's still there 30 years later and is more popular amongst the European population than it's ever been.
We get fed a constant diet of euroscepticism in the UK which distorts perceptions. There has also always been a strong tradition, particularly on the political right in the US, that wanted to see the EU fail, as it is perceived as a barrier to US economic hegemony on the continent. But the EU is still there, fortunately.
10 years? That seems awfully quick. A lot would have to happen for the dissolution of the EU in that time.
If anything I suspect the Brexit omni-shambles is the best advertisement for more fragile economies than the UK to remain in the EU. At the very least it will slow the dissolution down because it will make governments devise a slightly clearer plan than just asking:
'Do you want to be in Europe?'
'No - but how will that work?'
'Oh we'll figure that out later'
'Oh okay'.
This has nothing to do with what I want, and it would be inappropriate to draw any conclusions or inferences about my level of enthusiasm for the EU based on my comment above. I am certainly not swayed by political ramblings on either side. I've never been politically inclined in any one direction. This has to do with what I observe about the model as it currently stands, and the stresses that it will inevitably face in the future.
We are in a period of rapid economic flux and changing paradigms caused by massive wealth inequality and shifting political loyalties on account of realignments (these alignments were set first on account of Western colonialism, then post WW2 structures, then Soviet collapse, then then 911, then the rise of Asia and finally the financial crisis). These shifts are only going to accelerate on account of the massive debt that has been accumulated over the past decade (yes, since the financial crisis) and due to the policy responses that were employed to respond to that crisis. In addition, market volatility is accelerating as the US Federal Reserve Bank normalizes global rates. This increases the potential for another financial crisis. I'm not sure what the trigger will be this time, but there are many possible ones, including a currency run somewhere.
In such an environment, and without the UK as a distraction, the stresses on the EU will only continue to mount despite attempts by those in power to quell it (by force, if necessary). I have always argued that a common fiscal policy was a prerequisite of this model surviving and thriving. A common currency and monetary policy alone were never going to be enough. Unfortunately, that was never instituted because it would have required further loss of sovereignty and societal buy-in which was politically unsellable.
I'm not sure if it will necessarily dissolve in 10 years, but it wouldn't surprise me if another large economy chooses to exit within that time frame or it is restructured on account of economic pressures. That's my point about it existing in its present form.
The UK's problems really are self inflicted. Democracy can certainly be a difficult thing, but it's ultimately cathartic. They'll get through it, but it won't be easy in the near term. This is a necessary moment of introspection and contemplation for the UK. Once they are out they will have an opportunity to honestly shape their linkages and involvement within the changing global landscape in a more modern way.
a) I'll need a passport to travel to the UK this year, and b) to start the process of getting one if necessary. After all, in may, I'll go to Cardiff to see Katherine Jenkins sing, and I don't want to be stopped at the border (that is, at the Gare du Nord station in paris) for not having the necessary documentation.
If you think he's looking after yours and my best interest well..........
Fair comment.
All I am saying I suppose is all bets are off. Yes the EU could collapse but equally I wouldn't be surprised if it was still there in 100 years.
How many people have the US a chance in its early years? I'm sure there were many predicting it's failure and pointing to it's inherent structural weaknesses. But look how that turned out.
There are always people willing these big projects to fail and sometimes they do. But when there are overwhelmingly positive reasons for something to exist they tend to survive regardless. I suspect the EU is one of those things.
Ultimately though nothing lasts for ever. everything comes to an end.
I merely add it to the debate for consideration, as May's Withdrawal deal has failed spectacularly in Parliament. At least Mr Johnson had the guts to come out in favour of Brexit unlike Mrs May. May was a Remainer who then went on to benefit from the vacancy caused by the resignation of David Cameron as prime minister and present herself as the "Saviour of Brexit."
She might be a remainer but she is more faithful than most leavers to the outcome of the referendum.