Europe, Referendum & Brexit (formerly Europe..IN or OUT??)

(18-03-2017 02:54 )Censorship :-( Wrote:  

(18-03-2017 01:10 )wackawoo Wrote:  

(18-03-2017 00:27 )Censorship :-( Wrote:  FYI, the Union of the Crowns, where James VI of Scotland ascended to the thrones of England and Ireland, was in 1603; the Treaty of Union, which joined Scotland and England politically, was in 1707; The UK (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) was not formed until 1801, so you were only 200 years (or 'there abouts') off the mark.

Yes, I do know, hence the 'there abouts'.

Really? Everything you've posted contradicts this assertion.

(18-03-2017 01:10 )wackawoo Wrote:  And even if I didn't know you do realise there is wiki and google? mmmmmkay.

Perhaps you should check them out - you might learn something?

(18-03-2017 01:10 )wackawoo Wrote:  SNIP

But back then it was a monacy so James the 6 was James the first of England - same monarch reigned over both which essetially meant the two countries were indeed joined and that's the two we are talking about, not the other unimportant ones.

So, 'joined' equals UK, does it?

You do realise that just because you assert something, it doesn't make it true; we are, after all, talking about actual history, or do you not let trifling matters, such as facts, get in the way of a good ramble?

(18-03-2017 03:08 )Censorship :-( Wrote:  OK, lets have (yet) another go at this:

The No campaign said that the only way to guarantee Scotland's place in the EU was to remain part of the UK.

Thanks for your first attempt to explain this.

So far so good, this is what I stated.

Quote:The Yes campaign said that the only threat to Scotland's place in the EU was to remain part of UK.

So did I just read this right, blink, blink and thrice blink, read and re read.

No campaign was to say staying in the EU was the only way Scotland could stay in the EU, yet the Yes campaign was the only threat to being in the EU was to stay part of the UK.

Quote:At this stage, an EU referendum was part of the Tories European Election manifesto.

Something in a manifesto does not mean it will become a reality.

Quote:Any clearer, now?

Oh yes, quite, even more ridiculous than I thought.

Also everybody assumed, even on the night of the referendum, that the vote would be to STAY in the EU. So nobody thought that the UK would actually leave the EU. Therefore, being in the UK meant also being in the EU, the two went together as far as anybody was concerned. It is this very assumption that, apparently, led to the Stay vote in your referendum, the UK leaving the EU is the reason your Sturgeon wants a second referendum - is that clear to you?

Also thanks for confirming what I have stated.

(18-03-2017 03:23 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  

(17-03-2017 20:44 )wackawoo Wrote:  Yet your telling me that a scare tactic that Scotland would not be able to join the EU outside of the UK was used to make sure that Scotland voted to remain part of the UK and thereby remain in the EU.

Absolutely 110% YES.

Try and get your head round what you're being told, from people who were actually involved in the referendum (both sides).

I've just read that it was stay part of the UK and you will not be in the EU vs stay part of UK is the only way you will be part of the EU

Sturgeon is now wanting to the LEAVE the UK so they can apply to be part of the EU.

Can you not see what I am pointing out here? That it makes one part of the argument null and void?

ie an independant Scotland could indeed apply to be part of the EU, didn't you Scots realise this?

In addition, unless your Sturgeon has recieved some back room information the EU will still not have said Scotland will be accepted since Scotland is still part of the UK, has she said why she is so confident Scotland will be acepted? Has she given a time frame, will the EU just say, come in my friends and welcome, or will it take years of negotiations to join the EU.

(18-03-2017 03:09 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  Wrong

You can no more speak for every single Scots person then I can, but I do know eveybody assumed the UK would stay part of the EU, that was a given; it was be in the UK AND be in the EU.

The split was something like 44% to 55%, to remain in the UK but was 60% opposed to 40% to stay in the EU, so we are talking about a 5% drift here and nobody knows what makes that 5% is made up off, there could be people who voted both out of the EU and UK, or for the UK but not for the EU or against UK and for the EU or voted for both etc There could of course be a massive swing to out of the UK, in a couple of years if everyhting goes fairly painlessly, it could be a massive swing to stay in the UK.

Quote:Nobody in the EU would give any guarantees Scotland would be accepted anytime soon, Spain being the main veto-er because of Catalonia.

So why is the Sturgeon so certain now?

Quote:And yet you're so arrogant you think you know better than the people who lived through the campaign and voted on it.

Yes I am ignorant of it all, and no I don't think I know more and never claimed this; this is called an education, I am reading what you have writian but with fresh, unbiased eyes; and quite frankly some of it seems rather odd.

(18-03-2017 01:28 )wackawoo Wrote:  Bullshit. Nobody anywhere has made that claim.

The implications are weighted heavily that way.

Yet you're the one who seems to pluck facts out of nothing that had nothing to do with the whole referendum and vote and Brexit process. I duly suspect that you are a Daily Mail reader!!

(18-03-2017 00:27 )Censorship :-( Wrote:  

(17-03-2017 20:44 )wackawoo Wrote:  SNIP
...do they want to be part of a United Kingdom that has existed since James the first (or there abouts) or disolve this and be totally independant of Westminster

FYI, the Union of the Crowns, where James VI of Scotland ascended to the thrones of England and Ireland, was in 1603; the Treaty of Union, which joined Scotland and England politically, was in 1707; The UK (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) was not formed until 1801, so you were only 200 years (or 'there abouts') off the mark.

He was a very obsessed King wasn't he?

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  

(18-03-2017 03:23 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  

(17-03-2017 20:44 )wackawoo Wrote:  Yet your telling me that a scare tactic that Scotland would not be able to join the EU outside of the UK was used to make sure that Scotland voted to remain part of the UK and thereby remain in the EU.

Absolutely 110% YES.

Try and get your head round what you're being told, from people who were actually involved in the referendum (both sides).

I've just read that it was stay part of the UK and you will not be in the EU vs stay part of UK is the only way you will be part of the EU

Correct.

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  Sturgeon is now wanting to the LEAVE the UK so they can apply to be part of the EU.

Correct

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  Can you not see what I am pointing out here? That it makes one part of the argument null and void?

The situation is different now ffs, even you must be able to see that.

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  ie an independant Scotland could indeed apply to be part of the EU, didn't you Scots realise this?

Yes. It's never been about being able to apply. It's about the timescale for acceptance.

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  In addition, unless your Sturgeon has recieved some back room information the EU will still not have said Scotland will be accepted since Scotland is still part of the UK, has she said why she is so confident Scotland will be acepted? Has she given a time frame, will the EU just say, come in my friends and welcome, or will it take years of negotiations to join the EU.

Nobody knows yet. We're not voting tomorrow, the campaigns haven't even started.

(18-03-2017 04:50 )wackawoo Wrote:  

(18-03-2017 03:09 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  Wrong

You can no more speak for every single Scots person then I can, but I do know eveybody assumed the UK would stay part of the EU, that was a given; it was be in the UK AND be in the EU.

I can speak for 100% more Scots people than you do.

(18-03-2017 01:28 )wackawoo Wrote:  The split was something like 44% to 55%, to remain in the UK but was 60% opposed to 40% to stay in the EU, so we are talking about a 5% drift here and nobody knows what makes that 5% is made up off, there could be people who voted both out of the EU and UK, or for the UK but not for the EU or against UK and for the EU or voted for both etc There could of course be a massive swing to out of the UK, in a couple of years if everyhting goes fairly painlessly, it could be a massive swing to stay in the UK.

Fuck knows what point you think your making here.

(18-03-2017 01:28 )wackawoo Wrote:  

Quote:Nobody in the EU would give any guarantees Scotland would be accepted anytime soon, Spain being the main veto-er because of Catalonia.

So why is the Sturgeon so certain now?

Who knows yet. As I already pointed out, we're a very long way from casting any votes.

(18-03-2017 01:28 )wackawoo Wrote:  

Quote:And yet you're so arrogant you think you know better than the people who lived through the campaign and voted on it.

I am reading what you have writian but with fresh, unbiased eyes; and quite frankly some of it seems rather odd.

Only to your twisted sense of logic.

(18-03-2017 01:28 )wackawoo Wrote:  

Quote:Bullshit. Nobody anywhere has made that claim.

The implications are weighted heavily that way.

Only to you.

(18-03-2017 04:22 )wackawoo Wrote:  SNIP (lots of wackawoo 'logic', distortion of fact, misrepresentation of others' views etc.)

Also thanks for confirming what I have stated.

I must have missed that part!

(18-03-2017 08:31 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  

(18-03-2017 03:23 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  

(17-03-2017 20:44 )wackawoo Wrote:  Yet your telling me that a scare tactic that Scotland would not be able to join the EU outside of the UK was used to make sure that Scotland voted to remain part of the UK and thereby remain in the EU.

Absolutely 110% YES.

Try and get your head round what you're being told, from people who were actually involved in the referendum (both sides).

I've just read that it was stay part of the UK and you will not be in the EU vs stay part of UK is the only way you will be part of the EU

Correct.

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  Sturgeon is now wanting to the LEAVE the UK so they can apply to be part of the EU.

Correct

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  Can you not see what I am pointing out here? That it makes one part of the argument null and void?

The situation is different now ffs, even you must be able to see that.

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  ie an independant Scotland could indeed apply to be part of the EU, didn't you Scots realise this?

Yes. It's never been about being able to apply. It's about the timescale for acceptance.

(18-03-2017 04:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  In addition, unless your Sturgeon has recieved some back room information the EU will still not have said Scotland will be accepted since Scotland is still part of the UK, has she said why she is so confident Scotland will be acepted? Has she given a time frame, will the EU just say, come in my friends and welcome, or will it take years of negotiations to join the EU.

Nobody knows yet. We're not voting tomorrow, the campaigns haven't even started.

Yes, I thought I understood it correctly.

From what I have also gleaned from these responces, your Sturgeon has absolutely nothing concrete to offer anybody. There is no automatic joining of the EU by Scotland just becasue it is Scotland. I see no reaosn why they cannot apply to be in the EU but it could be years upon years before they would be allowed to join. It's almost as if she thinks Scotland is going to get some form of special treatment. When in fact in the rush to make an historic name for herself she is taking Scotland both out of the UK AND out of the EU as well for years.

Maybe then May is really quite correct in telling her to shut up and wait and see.

Pretty sure it's better to be in the UK and out of the EU for a few years rather than out of both for a few years.

Her argument is based on the assumption that Brexit is goign to be nothing but bad, and that's a silly assumption to base such and historic vote on.