The Brexit Arms. All welcome.

[surferjet]

So.....how are we all?

Is a reference coming any time soon time?

This is something very thought-provoking and I think we should all read it, Remain or Leave.

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/nrk-norwegian-news-site-comments-read-story-understand-post-quiz-questions-a7607246.html?amp

eulawanalysis.blogspot.ie/2016/09/is-eu-planning-army-and-can-uk-veto-it.html?m=1

Just adding some actual facts to the discussion on an EU Army

valentine2 I think the Schultz quote is more of a misquote from his speech to the LSE in September 2016 - transcript here:

Fourthly, in the fields of security and defence policy, although the EU loses a key Member State, paradoxically, such a separation could give the necessary impulse for a closer integration of the remaining Member States. The Franco-German proposal from this summer on security and the proposal from September on defence - largely endorsed in Bratislava - are a clear sign of things to come. And there are many ways in which the UK could engage and contribute to such a new more coordinated EU of 27 without standing in the way of such integration. I’m not sure how seriously to understand the threats of UK vetoes in this area that have been recently made. If we are indeed going to reset our relationship - I would make a plea to put an end to this systematic talk of blocking - which is counterproductive and anyway not possible in this case.

NB - the UK was not invited to the Bratislava summit in September which discussed defence and security amongst other topics.

The November 2016 vote referred to by Carolines is to improve co-operation throughout the EU on defence and security and properly funding NATO - details here.

And an interesting blog on the EU "army" and the UK veto can be found here:

As we saw above [discussion of 42(2) TEU] any Member State can indeed veto an EU ‘common defence’. But still, it’s striking to hear a supporter of the Leave side [Fallon] acknowledge that the UK can veto an EU army, since many of them suggested during the referendum campaign that this scary prospect was unavoidable if the UK remained part of the EU. Having said that, there’s a misunderstanding here. According to the information available, the proposal is not to create an EU army, and therefore the UK can’t veto it.

X-post with SixInTheBed

That is an interesting article Valentine and probably articulates what we have all thought at some time.

The question this article raises for me however, is that
Is it better to expose misinformation and misunderstanding so that it can be challenged ?

We know that emotions are opinion shapers. If your feelings about something are never countered by alternative views , or even actual facts , you run the risk of never developing critical thought . There is no public opportunity to correct misunderstanding.

Similarly , even if you gather the facts, examine their veracity and base your view on what seems most truthful, you still run the risk of living in an echo chamber and being out of step if you censor others comments.

Personally I read comment sections, listen to phone in show etc. It was something I started to do more of after Trump/Brexit and some other events , to compare and contrast popular option with evidence opinion, the whole twitterati versus paperati thing.

It can be painful at times .

There is a lot of off the wall stuff out there that doesn't rely on the facts but the thing is it exists and needs to be exposure to censure and criticism or it could grow. Public platforms allows for that .

Valentine - just at the Athletics World Champs waving my flag and cheering for good old Blighty so can't post link but didn't want to ignore your cries - if I recall one of the sources may have been The Independant?

Just adding some actual facts to the discussion on an EU Army

This is the sort of comment which has lead me not bother debating with remainers very much anymore. I know there are some very reasonable remain posters (& some lovely ones) but I'm just too sick of reading this sort of patronising guff. Is it not a "fact" that the report I linked to has been published? Was Guy V tweeting it not a "fact"?

wrong it's a proposal produced by one of the political groupings in the European Parliament. It's a fact that it has been produced - but nothing more.

The article I linked to is from an academic blog and is a factual evaluation of EU Law on this subject.

ALDE, the source of your link, are a political grouping promoting an agenda.

There is a difference.

X post with Random

"Just adding some actual facts to the discussion on an EU Army" and "It's a fact that it has been produced - but nothing more."

Are you serious?!

Lets try real facts shall we. Its done. Theyre now collating battlegroup priorities, along with identifying their immediate capacities. 40billion was assigned in June 2017, to then bolster military capabilities that were lacking from member states. And you guys are dragging out student blogs and old random articles that skirt the issues.

Read what the EU say;

www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/06/22-euco-security-defence/

Guy V. is indeed very excited, especially as its clear its intended to address "internal" threats as well as "external". So in 3 months, (para 8) youll know whether theyre sending an EU joint force to Turkeys border....or Polands.

and for clarity.....this is what PESCO is. The whole 'voluntary' (though every EU state now has to pay) bit, simply allows the EU council to act with a selective joint military force, WITHOUT every state agreeing to join, provide troops or even agree the proposed military action.

"As too much precious time has already been lost, in case not all of the 28 Member States are ready and willing to participate in integrating their military forces, the option for Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO, Art. 42(6) and Art 46 TEU) envisaged in the Treaty must be used to provide the basis for advancing with a core group of Member States. The PESCO would be open to all Member States and function within the EU institutional system. "

There have been EU battle groups for the last decade under the CSDP.

In its June 2017 statement on the future of EU defence [[http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-17-1517_en.htm
here]] the EU Commission states:

Is this a step towards the creation of an EU army?

The Reflection Paper on the Future of European Defence, or any of the discussed initiatives to foster closer cooperation on defence and security are not about creating an EU army or unnecessarily duplicating military planning and command structures that currently exist at national level and in NATO. Decisions relating to the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) are in any case taken by the Council of the European Union by unanimity.

The Reflection Paper on the Future of European Defence is intended to stimulate debate about creating the conditions for more defence cooperation, maximising the output and the efficiency of defence spending and providing the European Union and its Member States with the capabilities, structures, tools and financial resources that are needed to fulfil our responsibilities and security needs.

Thought I'd wander in for a quick sherry.

Everyone does know that our armed forces have been slashed monumentally to an unprecedented extent over the last decade don't they? We are heavily reliant on reservists...that's why there was a massive reservist recruitment drive on TV a few years back. I was always surprised it never got more tabloid front page attention.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/8790897/Defence-cuts-the-facts.html

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-left-britain-defenceless-huge-10376621

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/27/forces-braced-cuts-defence-cash-squeeze/

labourlist.org/2017/05/labour-must-make-clear-that-the-tories-have-cut-the-armed-forces-to-the-bone-writes-former-navy-commodore/c

Before that, we were embroiled in conflicts and loss of life we had no need to participate in to such an extent, contributing disproportionately in the United States interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It would have been a positive step to prioritise shared Interests with the security interests of other more moderate countries, rather than Trump who goes around threatening to 'nuke' people..

Before the referendum we could have ( past tense) had co-leadership of peace focussed joint EU defences, participating fully in joint decisions about shared use of group power. By reason of geography alone, we have closer shared interests with the Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium, France etc than we have with the US.

This is just to say I will come back in and reply. I am just stuck with a very unwell toddler for a couple of days now. 😣

Academic blog, shmacademic blog.
Introduce someone's interpretation of the situation by all means (we know from Brexit that academics NEVER let their opinions influence their work, don't we ) by all means. If you can't do it without sneering at other people's contribution to the discussion, I will assume, from my previous experience, that conversation is not going to be very productive. I have, over the last few months, come to the strong conclusion that there is no political common ground between me and people who assume a position of superiority over those they disagree with.

TBF, that blog contains articles from various professors qualified in a range of EU specialities at some pretty good institutions - dismissing it as a "student blog" is laughable. This might be the point where Gove's comments could be invoked.

Don't worry randomly, wrongs input on these threads since the referendum follows a saddenedly familar pattern

-Make a point
-Other people critique it
-instead of defending the position it turns into a moan about how Leavers are treated as inferior/ dismissed/ ridiculed/ called stupid .....insert as appropriate

More than a year on, me and many others are just waiting for a robust, calculated argument which gives us confidence in the future.....that's sadly lacking.

I'm still pissed off that "a vote for Remain was a vote for an EU army".

It's the kind of thing my mother comes out with, along with you can't buy Canary Islands bananas in the UK because of the EU

Fuck off Bear

Well that ticks the robust box

Kind of proves my point

No, it doesn't Bear. To prove your point, as I'm sure you know, would involve checking my previous posts to see if they follow your suggested pattern. I'm sure you are aware that one incident does not prove a pattern.

Just one point, if ppl are bored with leavers complaining about being patronised, belittled, talked down to etc, here's a thought. Why not try not patronising, belittling and talking down to them and then that whole issue could be avoided?Just a suggestion ☺

Can I just recommend Twitter to those who fancy a change from the MN referendum world? I have found it a breath of fresh air.

Don't know where that face came from. Supposed to be