Westminstenders: Rebel or Reveal

[RedToothBrush]

The EU Withdrawal Bill made it through the Commons. Though May did not manage it unscathed.

In an attempt to divide and conquer the Rebels, May might have damaged trust. We shall find out. The Grieve Amendment faces the Lords. We also will see if the Lords will back down on their amendments or apply some new ones for the Commons to deal with in Parliamentary Ping Pong.

Aaron Banks has been exposed as being pally with the Russian Embassy in a plot twist that absolutely everyone saw coming.

Meanwhile the EU thinks we have already run out of time and is preparing options to extend talks beyond the a50 deadline. These include having MEPs for the 2019 - 2024 session.

There is also growing talk around Europe that freedom of movement in its current form is unsustainable. Ironically we might see the EU adopt something akin to Cameron's pre-referendum proposals as the EU reforms.

Theresa May has also announced - at a moment when she is looking particularly weak - a new tax for the NHS, cunningly disguised in spin as 'the Brexit dividend'. Of course shareholders don't always get dividends and at times of poor economic performance instead might be asked to stump up extra capital...Expect to see buses with £350 million of the side just in time for the next general election cycle.

And so the Zombie PM limbers on towards the end of the summer session and the relative safety of the summer holidays. More drama, cringing and disbelief guaranteed before we get there.

Example on how the Special Relationship works wrt defence industries:

The UK signed up for £19 bn of the F-35 Flying Albatrosses / aka Joint Strike Fighters, because the UK govt naively believed US assurances
– without any signed legal documents –
that Rolls-Royce would be an alternate engine supplier
...
then the Pentagon decided to cut costs by dropping Rolls-Royce.

And there we are. Back again, on the same old military merry-go-round. Banging the same old drum. Protesting that we need a massive armed forces to defend ourselves around the world.

Let's get real here.

Terrorist attacks that happen in Britain are perpetrated by home grown terrorist cells, whose creation is directly caused by our interference in foreign wars, and our inability to meet immigrants with a sense of cooperation. The previous poster (on the previous thread, I believe) who mentioned that immigration and integration was a two way street was bob on.

The days of empire are gone. What, exactly, do our military forces accomplish overseas? In combination with our foreign policy (Syrian airstrikes anyone?), our arms trade directly into the gulf states, and our allegiance to some fucked up association with the USA, we aren't exactly making friends abroad. We are making our position more precarious, not less.

We can never fire trident. At least, not of our own volition. It is an expensive hunk of very dangerous metal. The mind boggles at how we can finance such a thing yet see our citizens sleeping rough, see children go hungry and require food banks for anyone.

And coming back to the idea of an EU army. Forgive me Duggee but I think you're a massive hypocrite. You resent European nations pursuing a military alliance because America is the main contributor to NATO. Ok, got that. But the reason is because European nations don't fund their armies to the extent that the US does. So now these nations propose funding a military alliance and that's no good either? You do understand that one of the primary purposes of the European project is to make any future land war in Europe an impossibility, right?

Let's not forget that military might is only so important when the best way to destabilise a region these days is with computers. A la Russia and the EU referendum.

The Royal Navy has 20 warships, but (at least in 2013) had 40 Admirals and 260 Captains.

Must get crowded on deck

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2465608/Royal-Navys-260-captains-just-19-warships-Defence-cuts-15-times-commanding-officers-vessels.html

I should clarify that I also don't believe there will ever be an EU army. I'm just gobsmacked that someone could get miffed at nations not putting their fair share into NATO but using it as a shield, then more miffed when those nations consider forgoing NATO and funding a common army.

Susan walker - you are right about that at least - an eu army wouldn’t have invaded iraq. Or indeed anywhere...

Peregrina - codswallop - nato prevented the ussr expanding further. Had it not been for that alliance of countries Russia would have been tempted to keep rolling its tanks west in 1945. But in your (presumably) left wing worldview the ussr was doubtless some socialist paradise...

Plonky

As someone who works in the sector concerned, I can tell you that our nuclear deterrent is absolutely not dependent upon anyone else. Submarines are at sea and able to fire on instruction from London.

Where do you get this nonsense from exactly?

{F35 WILL be owned.} We haven't got them yet and at the rate we are going won't be able to afford them.
With the formation of the EU the chances of a war between the European countries is regarded to be low. The next question would be who else are you going to fight. With alliance to USA/Russia/China who are the major players the situation becomes complicated. If any of them get really 'angry' all bets are off. If any nuclear state has a pop at Britain and lands one or two it is essentially 'goodnight' whatever Britain tried.
This is getting rather hypothetical and we are all waiting for you to come up with at least one decent reason to leave.

Plonky - you are right in one thing at least - the eu is a response to that curse of the 20th century - how to deal with an economically predominant Germany, preferably peacefully.

You will note we are not continental Europeans.

Check any map!

54321

Yes, If nukes land on London we are done for.

That’s why we have submarines at sea ready to fire missiles.

It’s called deterrence theory. Look it up.

A reason not to leave: you are all selling short term convenience and an economic comfort blanket for long term sovereignty. The end state is as an outpost of a federal superstate with our government being convened on foreign soil.

You are prostituting our future for cheap Spanish holidays and cheap mobile roaming charges.

If there is a no-deal Brexit, expect swingeing defence cuts as the economy crashes into recession

Big choc

You mean if - not when -unless of course you possess a crystal ball

Russia is a bankrupt shadow of the former USSR and its military reflects this
20% cuts in the last year -that's not because Putin has got nicer

I said IF there is a no-deal Brexit
50% chance May does another U-turn

Commonarewe
Try reading the opinion polls in European countries and looking at their recent election results - it's hundreds of millions of Europeans who hold these views and vote accordingly, not just British leavers

Ah yes. Sheer force of numbers behind a proposition always makes it right.

Now there's a blind alley if ever there was one.

I was referring to your predictions about the economy

Place mat king.

After two years of these threads, one thing that's been noticeable is the usually very low incidence of personal attacks.

Just saying.

Bigchoc

Cuts to conventional forces? Yes But Russia still has lots and lots of nuclear missiles so no one is going to mess with them.

Look at North Korea -estimated to have a handful of nuclear weapons but treated completely differently as s result

IIRC Stalin sacrificed 20 Million in WW2, many through starvation and cold by bad planning, incompetence and a ruthless command to 'win' even if the troops had no weapons or food.
Reading Heydugg's reply to Plonky, I think we should all be very afraid. The handling of nuclear missiles requires a thoughtful response, Heydugge has none of this. and still cannot come up with one reason to leave.
Firing from a British submarine is near pointless unless it is a 'first strike'. There will not be enough of Britain left habitable if one or two lands on it so a British firing is simply retaliation. Hurrah for the guys and gals in the subs but there won't be a home for them to go to.

Since the Uk referendum, support for the EU has risen in other EU countries

Of course, they are pissed off with some of the policies and with their own politicians
but the far right have mostly learned not to even put leaving the Euro in their manifesto, never mind leaving the EU
Some voters are angry about Muslim immigration, but noone wants to be poorer.

I see this in Germany - the AfD concentrates on immigration and has dialled right back on the EU itself
When it was founded several years ago, it was all about leaving the Euro, but that is hardly mentioned now

Duggee right you are, we can unilaterally fire it. My mistake, thanks for reaching me something.

Overall point still stands. The internet is now the most efficient way to destabilise a country. Military strength is so 20th century.

54321

You are missing the point of deterrence.

The point is this - yes, someone could nuke London, but they risk retaliation strikes from our submarines at sea in the aftermath. It is not a first strike weapon - it is making the risk for someone else so great that they will think twice about using nuclear weapons on us as a first strike

Plonky

Yes agree - first world states can be easily destabilised through cyber attack

That doesn’t mean nuclear weapons are obsolete though

Look at North Korea -estimated to have a handful of nuclear weapons but treated completely differently as s result

Yes, a few nukes are the only conceivable reason for handling N Korea with kidgloves...

Back on thread - if, when David Cameron did his various visits to the eu ahead of the referendum vote, that had yielded compromise I might have voted remain. There were sound reasons to do so.

But the eu seemingly doesn’t want to change its agenda.