Printable View
I actually ignored all the bull**** from both sides and a small part of my decision to vote Remain was precisely because I assumed we'd pretty much just cut the cord. If I'd been confident there would be a deal (limiting, lets say, further political integration and uncontrolled immigration) I would have voted LeaveQuote:
Originally Posted by ramAnag
Statler I believe, both being named after NYC hotels. If the programme was made today they would be called Pennsylvania and Anbang. Just thought I'd mention it.Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryRam
Isn’t that what we all feel at every ‘election’, Andy? We look at what we like and dislike from each manifesto and vote for the Party we have the most ‘matches’ with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy_Faber
Where the Referendum was concerned if you would have voted Leave, on the basis of your objections to closer ‘political integration’ and ‘uncontrolled immigration’, but ultimately didn’t there must have been some other very big reasons for not doing so.
One assumes then that the reasons you voted ‘Remain’ were most likely based around such aspects as trade, economics, national security etc.
For what it’s worth and as you know, I can understand some of your reservations about the EU. I do doubt however that anything that has happened over the last thirty eight months would have changed your mind over the trade and economic implications of leaving.
At the end of the day, in any Referendum or election we are unlikely, imo, to support every aspect of the ‘side’ we put our X next to.
We do what we think is best for ourselves or, better still, our country. To that extent, although I accept the EU is far from perfect, I haven’t changed my mind and continue to believe that, at least in terms of trade, economics and international reputation we have to, in the best interests of our country, try and avoid Brexit, especially a ‘no deal’ version.
So...now that the likely consequences of a ‘no deal’ Brexit have been revealed by the leaking of Operation Yellowhammer can we now abandon the term ‘Project Fear’?
I know some of the ‘Leavers’ on here treat anything written by the Guardian, the BBC or, for that matter Swale or I, with something between mistrust and contempt but the OY suggestions originated via the Civil Contingencies Secretariat and COBRA.
Perhaps now some may take more notice of the uncomfortable future that awaits us and recognise that such warnings are not synonymous with those unreasonably branded as ‘extreme’ or ‘hard left’.
Ok RA, I'm going to try and give you a sensible and calm response to that.
Hypothetical. - A meteor could strike the earth at any time. This is fact what do we do?
Best case scenario, its a basket ball size one, that would flatten a house.
Worst case scenario, it's the size of Everest and a planet killer.
Ok, we plan as well as we can to cover all things that may happen.
Plan A- is emergency treatment and more damage response.
Plan z - planet evacuation or a deep bunker for a select few.
Ok, go ahead and give me the paper work.
Hammond and his cronies in the civil service, leak out that a rock the size of Gibraltar is being planned for and it's going to hurt.
Nothing else, just a rock the size of Gibraltar.
You don't seemed concerned as to -
a. how a COBRA style document can get released to the press
b. who did it.
c. how much of it is all the truth of what is happening.
Several people have said that very thing, it should be planned for and if it wasn't. People like you would be squealing like a piglet that the government has bought doomsday on us.
This all stems from a photograph of some papers and a few words being readable.
Sorry, project fear in over drive again.
No one is saying it won't be without problems, but sod em now.
The resolve to get out is stronger than ever for me.
^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds
Contingency planning for everything. Non-story.
Ah...okay. Just thought I’d mention it.
You two clearly know so much more than everyone else...but so long as shortages of fresh food, shortages of fuel, shortages of medicine, civil unrest, higher prices and paralysed ports are not what a no-deal Brexit is likely to lead to and are just part of all our imaginations that’s alright then.
It may have the long term benefit of reducing the burden on the NHS by killing off people who might otherwise be a burden on resources, although short term there may be a spike in activity.Quote:
Originally Posted by ramAnag
Can I start the list off?Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone
A little bit of bread and no cheese?