Brexit, for once some facts.

anotherkiwi

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 26, 2015
7,845
5,786
The European Union
I haven't passed judgement flecc. Not my place. I live in UK. US citizens see it as their model of democracy. My point is all models of democracy are just that. A model. None perfect, as to which is best, who knows. We, ve moaned about ours enough which is fine. Moaning about somebody elses' is like commenting on neighbours wife. Not good form.
If that "democracy" runs about playing World Police I think we have the right to comment, even criticize. If they are only mucking about with their own population so be it.

An example: as long as Saudi Arabia imposed strange religious practices inside their own borders fine an dandy. When they took out two skyscrapers in NYC and flattened Yemen then they are opening themselves for criticism.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oldgroaner

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
No.
Because you silly feckers want the corrupt politician who got Luxembourg where it is in charge of us. Massive difference.And my criticism was not of their model of democracy just of Junkers and his immoral way of raising GDP, (Luxembourgs) at expense of rest of EU.
Last time I checked Trump isn't part of EU, you remember the corrupt, none democratic organisation we are trying to leave.
Going over previously ploughed ground again. How many times must you be reminded that the eu is a democratic organisation, set up by democratic or mostly democratic republics ..with a few monarchies included,.
 

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
No, I didn't.
We are in EU at moment. Junkers represents a massive power within it. His behaviour has massive influence on on the whole Brexit debate. You are being obtuse to mix up your failing argument. Junkers and Luxembourg are part and parcel of the very system under scrutiny. Trump and USA are not. We might as well discuss China's poor human rights, or Columbia and its drug problems.
My only point has been Trump, regardless of all his faults or whatever, deserves some credit for the progress on certain aspects. From that for some reason yourself, Kiwi etal have taken to keyboards, arguing against points I have not even made.
And regardless of any opinions held Trump was elected democratically, more so than Junkers.
The decision by Trump to meet with Kim is potentially credit worthy . I can agree with that as your Churchhill once said jaw jaw better than war war. But i would be suspicious as to the motives.
Your comment about the democratic creditionals of the election of Mr junkers is not worthy of a response... again it is ground we have already discussed.
 

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
If that "democracy" runs about playing World Police I think we have the right to comment, even criticize. If they are only mucking about with their own population so be it.

An example: as long as Saudi Arabia imposed strange religious practices inside their own borders fine an dandy. When they took out two skyscrapers in NYC and flattened Yemen then they are opening themselves for criticism.
Obviously you have, as I, ve already said. But don't do so and justify your OT replies through my posts. I say Trump was elected "democratically" and you launch into an attack of American methodology. No matter what you think of their system is totally irrelevant. It's theirs. End of. Your system is not perfect, neither is ours and neither is the EU, s model. Tony Benn himself stated EU is not democratic. You just search to attack every post I make. Trump deserves credit for his progress with North Korea. In effect that's all I was saying.
Telling us you don't think US has a democracy is irrelevant to my posts about Trump.
 
Last edited:

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
The decision by Trump to meet with Kim is potentially credit worthy . I can agree with that as your Churchhill once said jaw jaw better than war war. But i would be suspicious as to the motives.
Your comment about the democratic creditionals of the election of Mr junkers is not worthy of a response... again it is ground we have already discussed.
But you have responded.I didn't mention anything about how Junker was elected. I said his behaviour when PM in Luxembourg was questionable and EU (by its own definition and admission) has problems with democracy. Read their own report on subject. There is a word to represent the situation within EU. Demoicracy, the plural form of democracy. Democracy is rule of single countries, or identities. Almost by definition EU can not have democracy until its a single identity. In mean time it's a demoicracy of questionable nature.
And, if you take the trouble to investigate demoicracy you, ll see its the government of distinct different groups by choice of wanting to be there. Keeping UK in EU, when choice was to leave, is in fact a contradiction of the ideals the organisation purports to operate by. In a true demoicracy, once the choice by the people had been made to leave we, d be allowed to do so unpunished and with good grace. The EU is not democratic by any measure.
 
Last edited:

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
But you have responded.I didn't mention anything about how Junker was elected. I said his behaviour when PM in Luxembourg was questionable and EU (by its own definition and admission) has problems with democracy. Read their own report on subject. There is a word to represent the situation within EU. Demoicracy, the plural form of democracy. Democracy is rule of single countries, or identities. Almost by definition EU can not have democracy until its a single identity. In mean time it's a demoicracy of questionable nature.
And, if you take the trouble to investigate demoicracy you, ll see its the government of distinct different groups by choice of wanting to be there. Keeping UK in EU, when choice was to leave, is in fact a contradiction of the ideals the organisation purports to operate by. In a true demoicracy, once the choice by the people had been made to leave we, d be allowed to do so unpunished and with good grace. The EU is not democratic by any measure.
They are not stopping us leaving are they? the problem is we want membership without paying the fees we owe or obeying any rules to gain the advantages.
Great Urban Myth you have there.

We should be allowed to leave the Club without paying our bar fees, and still play in all future matches on the Green?

Our government doesn't even know truly what it does want, or worse what to do next when we leave.

The EU are preventing us leaving?
They aren't are they? just want a settelement on their terms not ours.

We will leave the same lasting impression a Brick does on the water
Thirty seconds after someones has tossed it in a pond

They will prosper, we will wither
That's what you get for making a bet as wild as voting for Brexit was,without thinking of the consequences, and worse, dragging the rest of us down into your mess with you.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Woosh

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Here we go in the Telegraph
"
Trump-Kim summit
Historic Singapore summit Kim Jong-un commits to 'complete denuclearisation of Korean Peninsula' in joint statement with Donald Trump

Things must have either gone very badly wrong witht the test site in North Korea, or they have achieved enough leverage to kid the Americans into a deal with an illusory threat.

And now Trump will regard himself able to break eggs with a big stick, imagining he's a major statesmanand all powerful and free to bully anyone he fancies.

Trump says he has a "Special bond with Kim"
A man that kills his own people with death squads and gulags?
The truth is Kim's Nuclear program has given him the propaganda edge he needed, and Trump has taken the opportunity to mug him, believing he has him at his mercy.

Can he trust Kim Jong- Un?........would anyone be that gullible?
The US and North Korean have entered into two major previous agreements over the past 26 years aimed at trading North Korean nuclear weapons for security guarantees and economic incentives. Both those deals, in 1994 and 2005 fell apart amid mutual suspicion, with each side blaming the other for violations.

In the absence of a deal, the Pyongyang regime has built up its arsenal. It is now believed to have at least two dozen warheads, including a thermo-nuclear bomb, and is close to building an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of delivering a warhead to the US mainland.

Kim declared in the New Year that the regime had completed its mission to build a nuclear deterrent, and since then has suspended nuclear and missile tests. Negotiations to hold a summit began in March, brokered by the South Korean government.


Patience.....wait for the Tweets.....
 
Last edited:

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,340
16,858
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Can he trust Kim Jong- Un?........would anyone be that gullible?
you should have said:

Can he trust Donald Trump?........would anyone be that gullible?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oyster

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,340
16,858
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
as a matter of fact, North Korea did not commit to a timetable nor verification.
DT has achieved publicity but not much substance.
NK is going to trade WMD for food anyway. Nothing the the signed document forbids them to 'leak' their technology to others.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oldgroaner

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
And for OG. An explanation of demoicracy etc. An EU study.
Ehttps://www.politics.ox.ac.uk/research-projects/the-construction-of-european-demoi-cracy.html
You aren't telling me anything new, the EU actually bothers to look at how it is organised, here we never do, so what is your point?
Here, have another link
http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199588770.001.0001/acprof-9780199588770-chapter-10
Once again it is an opinion that the treaties of Rome favoured this idea, and indeed they may have, in an incremental stage of the development of a Federal state, so don't make out this is a "bigger deal" than it really is.
Just a step along the road, that's all
 
Last edited:

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
as a matter of fact, North Korea did not commit to a timetable nor verification.
DT has achieved publicity but not much substance.
NK is going to trade WMD for food anyway. Nothing the the signed document forbids them to 'leak' their technology to others.
The document wasn't exactly presented well enough to be easy to make out the text, but as you say, nothing more than generalisations we have seen before were visible.
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2018/jun/12/trump-kim-summit-meeting-singapore-us-president-north-korea-kim-jong-un-
No matter how cynical we all are it's a small step forward , much more than any previous administration has achieved and credit worthy for both sides.
Your statement is incorrect
"No matter how cynical we all are it's a small step forward , much more than any previous administration has achieved and credit worthy for both sides."
Both countries have been there before, in 1994 and 2005, made similar agreements and these ended in failure.

This time they did just enough to glorify themselves in the headlines as saviours of the world to the mugs back home and nothing more that was new.
Great Publicity for two nutters.
"Peace in our Time!" comes to mind.
 
Last edited:

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,340
16,858
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2018/jun/12/trump-kim-summit-meeting-singapore-us-president-north-korea-kim-jong-un-
No matter how cynical we all are it's a small step forward , much more than any previous administration has achieved and credit worthy for both sides.
it is a positive step, better than nothing but before you give credit to DT, just think about the background facts.
At the time of Obama, NK would rather eat grass than giving up on the A-bomb. As long as China let them develop their nuclear weapons, there was nothing Obama could do to stop NK achieving their target. So Obama could only slow down the process, not stop it.
DT has been lucky on many occasions so far, but as Luke Rheinhart in 'the dice man', his luck would turn one day and the Donald will have to face real problems.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oldgroaner

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
Your statement is incorrect
"No matter how cynical we all are it's a small step forward , much more than any previous administration has achieved and credit worthy for both sides."
Both countries have been there before, in 1994 and 2005, made similar agreements and these ended in failure.

This time they did just enough to glorify themselves in the headlines as saviours of the world to the mugs back home and nothing more that was new.
Great Publicity for two nutters.
"Peace in our Time!" comes to mind.
Perhaps you, d rather Trump have sent in the 7th Fleet. It's not far away.
A few months ago it looked as though we could be facing nuclear conflict. Like I, ve said before I, m no great supporter of Trump but it's way better than expected. Credit where credit due, but you are too sour to offer that.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: oldgroaner

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Perhaps you, d rather Trump have sent in the 7th Fleet. It's not far away.
A few months ago it looked as though we could be facing nuclear conflict. Like I, ve said before I, m no great supporter of Trump but it's way better than expected. Credit where credit due, but you are too sour to offer that.
Not at all, unlike you I recognise a Con Man when I see one, and unlike you I'm not prepared to ignore history and make out he has done something new and novel, it isn't and he hasn't, and he got nothing out of these talks that wasn't gained and lost before.
Neither side are trustworthy and North Korea is far too weak militarity to threaten the USA, with missiles that with luck might reach The US mainland never mind hit an intended target.
Bogus news of a Bogus threat
Modern missiles are so reliable the last time we test fired a Trident it went off in the direction of America!
If that's the best America can do what faith can you have in North Korea's far less adanced technology (or China's for that matter?)
In fact if you check, only one country has ever test fired an ICBM at city sized target in 1962
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W47
Considering how much desert area exists in the world that could be targetted isn't it odd that the supreme nulear deterrent delivery systems remains purely hypothetical and untested?
 

Advertisers