Ship of Fools: Thoughts on PM May's Speech

Thread: Thoughts on PM May's Speech Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020058

Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :

Full text

Some quotes that stood out as I heard it on the way to work:

quote:
For more than two centuries, the very idea of America — drawn from history and given written form in a small hall not far from here — has lit up the world.

And it is my honour and privilege to do so at this time, as dawn breaks on a new era of American renewal.

And a newly emboldened, confident America is good for the world.

A future that sees us take back control of the things that matter to us — things like our national borders and immigration policy, and the way we decide and interpret our own laws – so that we are able to shape a better, more prosperous future for the working men and women of Britain.

Was it pure speaking to the audience [Republicans]? Is the word "renewal", as in "dawn breaks on a new era of American renewal", a strange one -- or is it just me? Are comments such as, "I defy any person to travel to this great country at any time and not to be inspired by its promise and its example." true, or a bit of exaggeration for the masses?

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

What do I think? This is what I think.

Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :

Which one is wearing the high heels?

[Miss Amanda will get her wrap.]

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

Just now skimmed the full text. To my American mind, possible interpretations:

--The Special Relationship still stands.

--Don't pull out of the UN.

--It's not all about you bozos. We do a bunch of stuff, too, and don't you forget it!

--I studied history. [Biased]

--Our former colonies there clearly need firm guidance. We're stepping up.

--Be very careful about Russia. DUH!

--Lather, rinse, repeat.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

I think the thing to listen for is the "mood music" rather than the words that May is actually using.

The Trump White House couldn't be bothered to check the spelling of her name. May couldn't rule out a trade agreement which would include access for US corporations to the NHS.

These things are more important than the words she used in a speech, which was largely for a domestic audience albeit delivered to the Republicans.

The reality is quite stark, in my opinion.

On one side we have Trump who is talking about US first and talking about restricting competition from non-US brands inside the US market. It is hard to see that he's going to want a trade agreement with anything less than full and free trade for USAmerican corporations inside the UK (which has certain implications for various EU protections and regulations which currently apply in the UK) and at the same time is unlikely to want to welcome in British corporations to compete inside the USA on the same terms.

May, on the other hand, is obviously looking towards the USA as a major source of trade give that trade with the EU will almost inevitably be more difficult.

The nightmare scenario for the UK economy would be if Trump blusters his way to get a lopsided deal which May feels forced to accept.

And so with everything else as well. Defence, international relations, etc. May might be saying the right things about torture today, but is she going to say no to black sites in the UK when Trump dangles some trade carrot or threatens some kind of thaw in the "special relationship"?

Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :

What do I think? Let me see...

[Projectile]

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

I note that she was quite happy to talk to a bunch of Republicans about their shared values but has turned down the opportunity to address the Irish Dail.

Not, if I may say so, a good look.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I note that she was quite happy to talk to a bunch of Republicans about their shared values but has turned down the opportunity to address the Irish Dail.

Not, if I may say so, a good look.

Quite. At the moment she has one big job to do, that is to make Brexit work. She's onto a loser, but she should at least be giving it her attention. And, that means maintaining relations with other parts of the "family of nations within the EU" (to quote the part of the Conservative manifesto that said the Conservatives would be maintaining the UKs place in the EU). Of all of them, Ireland is probably the most important - because Brexit will have a massive impact on Ireland, more so than any other EU nation (excluding, of course, the UK).

Yes, a trade deal with the US would be nice. But, it's the icing on the cake after a workable Brexit is achieved. Making Brexit work cannot be allowed to be held hostage to the whim of Trump. Brexit needs to work irrespective of any trade deals with other nations. Cosying up to the Republicans and Trump, to recreate some mythical "special relationship" does nothing to make Brexit work, and for many of us "friend of Trump" is not the sort of title we'd want applied to our Prime Minister, much less the country as a whole - and, is unlikely to win many friends in Europe when our government gets down to serious negotiations.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
... for many of us "friend of Trump" is not the sort of title we'd want applied to our Prime Minister, much less the country as a whole ...

Hear, hear! [Overused]

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

I couldn't possibly voice my thoughts on May's speech and visit in a polite forum like Purgatory. The fact that she was first in the queue to visit the Tangerine Fool is cause for shame enough, but when she pointedly refused to say the NHS would be left out of any trade deals, I got seriously scared.

All in all, I concur with Doc Tor's view above.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

(By the way, I've just heard that members of the British Press Corps are currently locked out of the White House, because their dates of birth were submitted in British dd/mm/yyyy format, and White House Security can't comprehend!)

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

I've just had to turn the TV off. Mrs May saying "As you renew your nation as we renew ours..."

What has she been reading, drinking, breathing? Trump is renewing your nation? This is renewal? Telling the media to shut up? Turning off the science? Condemning people to death by cutting health supplies?

I suppose you could describe as renewal what happens to a caterpillar eaten from inside by wasp larvae. Or ants taken over by fungi.

And I think of that not very good Dr Who story with the farting aliens disguised as politicians in No 10, unzipping themselves from the skins they have taken. What does Trump's hairpiece hide?

What is happening to us?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Has anybody noticed whether Missus May's nose has changed colour yet?

[Projectile]

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

Great galloping god almighty - she held his hand! [Disappointed]

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Better to hold both his hands given his reputation.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

Just bring a large, stout handbag. Hold it in front of you at -all- times.

Posted by Beenster (# 242) on :

He says he's coming to the UK later this year - that's one election promise he's backtracked on regrettably.

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

The Queen invited him. I hope she gives him her son's Ladybird book. Should be about his level.

Publisher's page

Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :

Oh dear. I've always been a great admirer of Her Majesty, but I was so hoping she'd refuse to receive him. I'll write it off to her advancing age.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

I'm not sure Her Majesty would have had much choice. If her Prime Minister asks her to extend an invitation to the head of state of another country to visit the UK then she does as she is told, and burns her gloves after shaking hands.

Posted by PaulTH* (# 320) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amanda.B.Reckondwythe:
Oh dear. I've always been a great admirer of Her Majesty, but I was so hoping she'd refuse to receive him. I'll write it off to her advancing age.

This is nonsense! Alan is right that The Queen doesn't make these invitations herself. But every US President makes a visit to the UK during the presidency. As Mrs May got the first invitation to the White House, it's only fair that President Trump makes an early visit to the UK. It's just the way the world works.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

I'm counting on you, UKians. The man understands only crowds. Show up in pussy hats and protest signs. Make him feel that pain. If you can make up some truly scurrilous chants so much the better. (In DC it was "He's orange! He's gross! He lost the popular vote!")

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

How about 'He's an awful git, and he looks like sh*t!'?

At least it rhymes.

I'll get me coat.

IJ

Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Has anybody noticed whether Missus May's nose has changed colour yet?
IJ

No change in colour but a distinct change in length. Again. This is what happens if you give the Donald's ego a massive orgasm. OTOH, by doing so, Wacky May might manage to moderate him on a number of issues and get him to tone it down a bit. There again, probably not.

Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I'm not sure Her Majesty would have had much choice. If her Prime Minister asks her to extend an invitation to the head of state of another country to visit the UK then she does as she is told, and burns her gloves after shaking hands.

Pity she couldn't burn her prime minister instead. Her namesake would have.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I'm not sure Her Majesty would have had much choice. If her Prime Minister asks her to extend an invitation to the head of state of another country to visit the UK then she does as she is told, and burns her gloves after shaking hands.

HM has always done as she was advised - including hosting the Ceausescus amongst others.

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

May didn't have to congratulate him on his stunning victory, did she? Makes me sick. (Mind you, by comparison with hers, not even the result of an election within her party, it may be stunning.)

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

On second thoughts, it is possible to interpret "stunning" as "completely unpredictable", "incredible", and in a number of other ways implying that it would have been better unachieved.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
This is what happens if you give the Donald's ego a massive orgasm. OTOH, by doing so, Wacky May might manage to moderate him on a number of issues and get him to tone it down a bit. There again, probably not.

H'mmm Britain's PM there to moderate the ambitions of an American president. Sounds awfully familiar. Think the can-carrying tainted Tony might be able to offer 'wet-behind-the-ears' Theresa some advice on that one.

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

All of the fuss about Trump can distract from the bigger picture.

Trump will be there for 4 years (max, surely). He will cause pain and damage and hatred. He will be a disaster. But he will not be able to do half the stuff he wants to, and his successor will spend a lot of time undoing this. Longer term, there might be relief from this. Assuming that Trump doesn't actually start a major war with anyone.

Theresa is planning to take us out of the EU. That will take years to sort out, and will probably trash our economy in the meantime. She is trying to destroy the NHS, which will kill people and would take decades to rebuild.

So while Trump is dangerous, stupid and everything else people have said, I think May is more dangerous, long term. So the idea of May being a calming influence is seriously and dangerously mistaken.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

A lot of folk seem mightily confident that trump will be gone in 4 years, just as they were similarly confident he wasn't going to be elected in the first place. My money is on him being there for 8 years whether the rest of the world likes it or not.
Brexit is about altering trading conditions, can't see how this compares with America electing an outspoken and controversial maverick as it's supreme Commander in chief.

Besides which if Britain leaving the EU is going to be a total bloody disaster, as many seem equally convinced of, then T. May with her slender majority will be booted at the next Election. But with Corbyn beginning to sound distinctly more pro-brexit, (probably due to trumps victory), I don't see any of that happening either.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

More like 12 years, when he changes the length of time presidents can be in office ...

Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :

Miss Amanda:

quote:
Oh dear. I've always been a great admirer of Her Majesty, but I was so hoping she'd refuse to receive him.

As several other people have already pointed out she doesn't have much choice in the matter, whatever her private opinion of him may be. And she has always done her duty as head of state, even when it meant shaking hands with former members of the IRA.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

Which is why it comes down on you, the GBP. HM can't tell him what she thinks. So you do it.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Fair comment, and I'm sure we'll think of something....

[Snigger]

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

I can't find the full text of May's seech, but this chilled me. "May heaped praise upon Republicans for their election victories in November, saying it was an "honor" to address them as "dawn breaks on a new era of American renewal."

I can't believe she wants what he wants. But she said we were renewing, too.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

The "special relationship" sounded obsequious and like the UK is the USA's pet. Why all the pandering?

UK total trade is about 1/6 of Canada's or Mexico's with the USA. No shared border. We've discussed other countries joining NAFTA but the UK never has come up. Though USA may torpedo its NAFTA involvement. Which will be a pretty big deal for it seeing how much import and export it is jeopardizing. The UK is small potatoes in comparison. Maybe it's all posturing because of referendum politics took the place of parliamentary.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Rejection of the petition calling on government not to invite Trump on a state visit because it will undo the good work Mrs May has done. As though undoing that would be a bad thing.

Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :

So, Mrs May, you only want to make populist gestures if the populace agrees with you? Aaagh! [brick wall]

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

"The good work May has done". That is a short list. I am still trying to think how to start.

She has aligned herself with one of the most vile leaders in the world. Not in my name, in her own. In doing so, she has distanced herself from all good reasonable people.

Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on :

We must all hope, for Her Majesty's sake, that the President will have been house-trained in advance of his visit. On the available evidence, that doesn't seem to be the case at present.

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

The best way to deal with someone as unstable and narcissistic as Trump may well be to "big him up" in public while working behind the scenes to reduce the damage he does.

The fact of the matter is that Trump is the President. None of us can change that now. There are a few people who can potentially do something to change how he governs, and they'll only be able to do that if he keeps agreeing to talk with them - it's clear that he will not even begin to consider anything said by anyone he sees as an enemy, and that he sees anyone who openly criticises him as such.

May could have utterly condemned Trump, and it would have resulted in the UK having to stand and watch without any influence on Trump's America. Or she could play the game, maintain a relationship between the two countries, and hope for a chance to use that relationship for good.

The sort of scorched-earth, all-condemning, total-refusal-to-engage approach so many of you seem to favour is great for feeling all morally superior, but it does fuck all in terms of real world effects.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

There's a lot of room between "utter condemnation" and capitulation embodied by an instant invitation to a state visit.

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

There's also a good case for 'make polite noises and watch and wait'. Granted we're stuck with him for the next four years but rolling out the red carpet, at this early juncture, could well be premature.

I think the problem is that whilst the country doesn't have a viable opposition May knows that the danger to her position comes from the headbanger right rather than the prospect of losing a General Election. So she's sucking up to Trump and hoping for a UK-US trade deal that will merely be awful (and therefore cheered to the rafters by the right wing press) than one that is so howlingly rancid that even the Labour Party might find the stones to vote against it.

Brexit means Trump. We've basically decided to turn our back on Europe and hope that we can play patacake with an authoritarian white nationalist. I really can't see this ending well.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
There's a lot of room between "utter condemnation" and capitulation embodied by an instant invitation to a state visit.

Exactly.

She could have waited. Unseemly haste, shell repent at leisure [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

As Callan says, I think it smells of desperation. She must see a close partnership with the US as the UK's only hope.

Given that I had her pegged as cool-headed and a clear thinker (quite a track record as Home Secretary...), I would have thought she realises how futile it is to try and strike a deal with a con artist. In which case the desperation is verging on blind panic.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

No, folks. Do not jump onto the sinking ship here. Keep your distance from our vortex. Remember what we could not, that there is no entity, no human being, no business, that has ever associated with the PG in Chief and ever been happy afterwards.

Posted by Louise (# 30) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:

Brexit means Trump. We've basically decided to turn our back on Europe and hope that we can play patacake with an authoritarian white nationalist. I really can't see this ending well.

Exactly. Trump doesn't give a fuck about his own country's constitution. He's got white supremacists like Steve Bannon pulling his strings and he's aligned to Putin. To think Theresa May has any real influence on him is delusional, but people who've bet the farm on Brexit have to pretend it'll all be fine, as to do anything else would be to admit that 'taking back control' actually translates as being so weak and friendless we have to get down on our knees and grovel to white supremacists and journalist-jailers, and pimp out the Queen while we're at it.

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Brexit means Trump. We've basically decided to turn our back on Europe and hope that we can play patacake with an authoritarian white nationalist. I really can't see this ending well.

Do you really think so? The UK has long tried to forge a close relationship with the United States (mainly on defence and foreign affairs issues) and the Thatcher / Reagan, Blair / Clinton, Blair / Bush and Cameron / Obama relationships were all cultivated when we were fully paid up EEC / EU members. Had Britain voted 52% Remain I'm not sure what would've changed.

[ 31. January 2017, 19:27: Message edited by: Anglican't ]

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

If the two old opposing Super Powers really are going to jump into bed with each other then the UK would be pretty foolish to play the prude and turn it's back on the whole thing.
If the 30's Germany hysteria spectacles are removed for one moment it could be that the world is now stood at the edge of an unprecedented period of prosperity.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Had Britain voted 52% Remain I'm not sure what would've changed.

Like so much else right now, the problem is one of checks and balances.

EU membership supplied some useful ones against the prospect of the UK simply becoming Airstrip One, as now seems more likely.

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Had Britain voted 52% Remain I'm not sure what would've changed.
Like so much else right now, the problem is one of checks and balances.

EU membership supplied some useful ones against the prospect of the UK simply becoming Airstrip One, as now seems more likely.

Such as what? EU membership didn't stop the UK taking a role alongside the US in a controversial war that many European nations opposed.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

No, but it did give the UK access to the Single Market. I cannot think May throwing herself at Trump's feet is about anything other than the sudden desperate need to have trading partners the UK hasn't recently antagonised.

It also put the UK in various summits such as the Council of Ministers. Having other Member States as partners provided some insulation against US influence, whether you think that was good or bad.

[ 31. January 2017, 20:02: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

Listening to the debate in the Commons today, I was tiny tiny bit persuaded that there might be mileage in the idea that the EU needs a good deal from Brexit.

The rationale being that in losing the UK, the EU is losing a net contributor (which, incidentally, it wouldn't get if Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland together or independently rejoined). The bills are increasing, the pressure is increasing and it may well be the case that any kind of net contributions from the UK would be better than a big hole of nothing if the UK left.

Ideally the EU presumably would like to charge the UK through the nose for being part of the common market, Horizon 2020 and the other goodies that the UK wants. But given that May seems to have rowed back on the idea of taking the common market with freedom of movement, it seems plausible that the EU nations might take some other deal as long as the contributions to the UK were net-positive.

And - maybe - that wouldn't be too hard to work out on paper. If the UK wasn't part of the CAP and wasn't taking money from the structural funds then maybe the EU doesn't have to receive much in the way of paying-over-the-odds from the UK for H2020 and the healthcare of UK pensioners in the EU and something that looks a bit like the common market.

Punishing the UK for Brexit risks May leaving with no deal (which would be stupid, but I'm not sure the EU leaders can afford to take that risk given the black hole it would leave in the finances).

But giving too much of a sweetheart deal risks the collapse of the whole EU project. There is no point in having an EU if a country can leave and get an equivalent or better deal.

It's a bit like poker, with each side trying to decide how the other is likely to play the cards they are dealt and trying to ensure that they don't put too much on the table.

That said, I still think that a good EU deal is going to be crap for Wales for several reasons; not least because the Tory government is never going to match the funds which currently come from the EU and any trade restrictions will leave us in a worse position.

But maybe we are being over-negative about the idea of the EU punishing the UK. I'm not sure they can afford to do that.

The stakes are high for both sides.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
... it could be that the world is now stood at the edge of an unprecedented period of prosperity.

Along with Alice's Queen, if you can believe that, you must have spent many years practising believing six impossible things before breakfast.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Fair enough Enoch
But if you look at the last Century and consider all the possibilities that were thwarted by the waging of war, the suspicion of war and the preparation for the threat of war then why not believe in something different.

Trump/Putin as part of a world government may not be perfect, far from perfect in the opinion of many, I get that. However, can anyone find a 'perfect' in 10,000 yrs of human struggle?

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Brexit means Trump. We've basically decided to turn our back on Europe and hope that we can play patacake with an authoritarian white nationalist. I really can't see this ending well.
Do you really think so? The UK has long tried to forge a close relationship with the United States (mainly on defence and foreign affairs issues) and the Thatcher / Reagan, Blair / Clinton, Blair / Bush and Cameron / Obama relationships were all cultivated when we were fully paid up EEC / EU members. Had Britain voted 52% Remain I'm not sure what would've changed.

Yes, I really think so. Most state visits have been offered to US Presidents when they have been in situ for a couple of years, not in the first week. Had Remain won by 52% Cameron would have sent congratulations on the inauguration and then played it cool. He wouldn't have offered a state visit in exchange for being the first foreign leader to visit in the hope of negotiating a trade deal to make up for crashing out of the Single Market. Particularly not during the first week of a President's incumbency which looks fair set to be wholly disastrous. When Cameron was Leader of the Opposition he actually got gip from the right wing press for being, as they saw it, excessively critical of US Foreign Policy. Granted Cameron's leadership of the Tory party was characterised by his thinking tactically rather than strategically but his current position wouldn't have been based on the same desperation as Mays.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

I agree with that. I thought Mrs May had a desperate air, going over to see Trump, and then offering the state visit. She has no choice really, faced with the exit from Europe. She has to cultivate other markets, and other political allies. We just have to hope that the desperation doesn't impel her to sell us down the river.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

further down the river.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Or into the river, soaking wet, without anything to hold on to, and on the bank, various right-wing politicians are shouting, 'you have to help yourself now!'.

Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :

I don't see this "no choice" thing. It's not as though we would cease to trade with the US otherwise - any more than we will cease to trade with the EU after Brexit.

Posted by Humble Servant (# 18391) on :

I think we should be talking about sanctions, rather than trade deals, given the direction of travel on torture and refugees.

[ 01. February 2017, 11:28: Message edited by: Humble Servant ]

Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
I don't see this "no choice" thing. It's not as though we would cease to trade with the US otherwise - any more than we will cease to trade with the EU after Brexit.

From the POV of the country as a whole, you are probably correct. From the POV of the politicians who have tied their stars to Brexit (including May) not so much.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
I don't see this "no choice" thing. It's not as though we would cease to trade with the US otherwise - any more than we will cease to trade with the EU after Brexit.

It's possible that trade with Europe will be hit; for one thing, the problems of harmonization of regulations could turn out to be huge. At the moment, a truck driving from Hungary to Manchester goes through borders relatively smoothly - what happens after Brexit? Checking of documents, checking of loads?

Any competent government has to allow for this, unless they are just going to start shouting, 'everything will be alright'.

Probably, the EEA will still permit such smooth transits, but are this government rejecting that?

[ 01. February 2017, 12:14: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]

Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

Probably, the EEA will still permit such smooth transits, but are this government rejecting that?

Yes, they have rejected it as a side effect of rejecting everything it is based around (single market, customs union, dispute resolution).

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

I thought that May had made various Delphic remarks about accepting part of the customs union, or having an adjunct to it, or something.

The EEA seems a way in which many issues could be parked, for however long it takes, e.g. harmonization, but I suppose the headbangers will not wear it.

Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :

But there is no reason to suppose that the EU would allow Britain to remain part of the EEA under any circumstances.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
But there is no reason to suppose that the EU would allow Britain to remain part of the EEA under any circumstances.

Citation?

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Amusing reports that someone riding a horse across the Irish border, would need paperwork.

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Trump/Putin as part of a world government may not be perfect, far from perfect in the opinion of many, I get that.

It's hard not to think that, with Russia and the US as allies, a major war is less likely.

That doesn't mean it would be a good world to live in, of course...

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Trump/Putin as part of a world government may not be perfect, far from perfect in the opinion of many, I get that.
It's hard not to think that, with Russia and the US as allies, a major war is less likely.

China?

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
That doesn't mean it would be a good world to live in, of course...

With all this trump an brexit stuff going on it seems that many think the world will be less good. Going against much of written on these boards in recent months, even some of my own commentary, it could be that this is all a gigantic misconception .

I mean all this talk of trump the facist and Theresa the appeaser, has anyone here really stopped to consider what this Country would look like if IS used strategically placed mini-nukes to grab power here?
Unlikely I'll grant you, but 5 minutes living under that regime would give all of us here the true meaning of callousness, bigotry, fascism and all the other words that have become cheapen and fashionable to throw about like confetti.

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:

quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
That doesn't mean it would be a good world to live in, of course...
With all this trump an brexit stuff going on it seems that many think the world will be less good. Going against much of written on these boards in recent months, even some of my own commentary, it could be that this is all a gigantic misconception .

I mean all this talk of trump the facist and Theresa the appeaser, has anyone here really stopped to consider what this Country would look like if IS used strategically placed mini-nukes to grab power here?
Unlikely I'll grant you, but 5 minutes living under that regime would give all of us here the true meaning of callousness, bigotry, fascism and all the other words that have become cheapen and fashionable to throw about like confetti.

Jesus tap-dancing Christ you do talk bollocks. Granted that a nuclear attack by ISIS would be bad and wrong but Trump and May being preferable to said attack is a pretty low bar to carry. Mrs Thatcher was expected to be better than Mr Callaghan. Mr Blair was expected to be better than Mr Major. in a sensible representative democracy it is taken as read that the government is preferable to a nuclear strike by a bunch of loonies.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Quite interesting to see Osborne in the Commons today, saying that the govt are prioritizing immigration over the economy. I thought that this was also rather Delphic, as he might have added, 'and when it goes tits up, don't blame me'. But he didn't.

He got the sack, but he is coining it in, as they say.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Ivan Roberts, giving evidence to the Select Committee, says that the EU will not give way on sector by sector deals, e.g. on fishing, agriculture, and so on. He also said that Richard North's idea of Flexcit is not a goer.

What does this mean? That only a total deal is acceptable to the EU? Anyway, Roberts seems to think this will take until the 2020s, and is a massive negotiation. Well, obvs.

Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
But there is no reason to suppose that the EU would allow Britain to remain part of the EEA under any circumstances.
Citation?

"The only alternative to a hard Brexit is no Brexit": Donald Tusk 13/10/16. He also said that May's speech of Jan 17, widely interpreted as heading for hard Brexit, was "more realistic".

I think the EU are glad to get shot of us. They wish we would hurry up and trigger Article 50 - they don't see why we didn't do this before the end of last June.

Posted by Louise (# 30) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Trump/Putin as part of a world government may not be perfect, far from perfect in the opinion of many, I get that.
It's hard not to think that, with Russia and the US as allies, a major war is less likely.

That doesn't mean it would be a good world to live in, of course...

This is the chap he just put on the NSC.

Donald Trump's closest advisor thinks that the US will be at war with China in the next few years.

Good luck with that.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
"The only alternative to a hard Brexit is no Brexit": Donald Tusk 13/10/16. He also said that May's speech of Jan 17, widely interpreted as heading for hard Brexit, was "more realistic".

Yes, but without wanting to sound like a Brexit Tory, he would say that.

In reality, the EU is losing a net contributor in the UK, so it is hardly in the interests of the EU countries to offer such a crap deal that May marches out with all her toys.

I accept they can't offer a really good deal and can't look like they're offering something that looks like EU membership without all the trappings (thus destroying the whole thing), but if they can somehow get a deal whereby the UK contributes more than they take out, then that is pretty good going for them compared to a big black hole where the UK contributions used to be.

quote:
I think the EU are glad to get shot of us. They wish we would hurry up and trigger Article 50 - they don't see why we didn't do this before the end of last June.

I think there is a level of talking up positions going on. I don't think the EU is really "glad to get shot of us" because they're interested in economic stability, and the whole thing looks less stable without the UK contributions.

So, from this arch-Remainer, I'd say that there might be more to discuss with the EU than I even thought last week.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Well, if President Trumpannon reckons the US will be at war with China in a few years' time, I think I'll forget about any more home painting and decorating....and I'll stop worrying about Brexit, too..

IJ

Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

So, from this arch-Remainer, I'd say that there might be more to discuss with the EU than I even thought last week.

This is what the Leave side tried to tell us before the referendum! It didn't make sense then and it makes even less sense now...

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Jesus tap-dancing Christ you do talk bollocks. Granted that a nuclear attack by ISIS would be bad and wrong but Trump and May being preferable to said attack is a pretty low bar to carry.

The point I was making wasn't about preferability, is was about perspective. It could be that this new trump-style provocation politics requires exaggeration from the opposing side. However, name calling didn't stop him getting elected so he's not likely to be bothered the facist accusations and general hysteria flying about now.

We could debate forever over what does, or does not classify as a better world. Accepted a war between the US and China wouldn't fall into many people's dictionary definition of 'better'. But can May's or any other world leader's snub make a difference to what goes on in the US?

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

rolyn--

Respectfully, have you noticed the horrible things Trump is *already* doing?

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Also respectfully Golden Key, the things he has so far done after just 2 weeks in office look relatively horrible by the standard of some of the sentiment that preceded him. Regardless of whether we agree with it or not, the only thing trump is guilty of so far is doing what he said he was going to do.

Stone-hearted though it may sound, it simply is not aceptable to an increasing majority in Western Countries that our doors should be opened to an unlimited number of folk from other disadvantaged countries-- accepted the current contention is over direct discrimination.
Personally I am not overly comfortable with brexit or trump, their success though is directly linked to the catastrophic error in 03 that went on to cause massive instability in the mid-east. Although there is doubtless a viewpoint that says the removal of Iraq's and Libya's oil-rich dictators was a good thing with the human cost an unfortunate consequence.
It remains to be seen if whether trump's crass alienation of Muslims makes matters worse or merely serves America as a damage limitation exercise. Horrible and good things lay ahead of us, horrible and good things lay behind us . This is the way the world is.

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I'm counting on you, UKians. The man understands only crowds. Show up in pussy hats and protest signs. Make him feel that pain. If you can make up some truly scurrilous chants so much the better. (In DC it was "He's orange! He's gross! He lost the popular vote!")

How about this chant?:

Not work safe

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

rolyn - I do see where you are coming from, but to refuse to accept people from countries where we (the west at least) have caused the instability, the problems, where we are continuing to provide the weapons is disgusting.

Maybe we shouldn't open our borders to anyone from anywhere - although personally, I think we probably should - but to close them to those we are responsible for uprooting is wilful blindness.

What is more, the way that Trump (and May and Cameron) has done this also shows an appalling blinkered sight. Trump has arbitrarily blocked most people from certain random countries. The only logic is that he is anti-Muslim. That is not acceptable.

I was reading yesterday that applications for nursing have reduced in the UK (hardly surprising). The government wants to limit immigration from the EU as well as further. Which makes me ask, where on earth will we get the nursing staff for the future from - so many are from other countries, and clearly home-grown talent is not really wanted, so we will hit an even bigger crisis (which will not only hit the NHS, of course).

I think the anti-immigration legislation is far too late. We rely on immigrants. We have historical responsibilities to immigrants. And, in the UK, we have quite enough emigrants as well, so it is a two-way process.

Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on :

It is not acceptable to some to be held responsible for their actions, and for supporting those who are suffering the consequences of those actions? Tough shit. They'd better learn to suck it up, because it's coming and it's not going to stop.

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I'm counting on you, UKians. The man understands only crowds. Show up in pussy hats and protest signs. Make him feel that pain. If you can make up some truly scurrilous chants so much the better. (In DC it was "He's orange! He's gross! He lost the popular vote!")

Actually, it's a perfect response to the "oh, but demonstrations never change anything" people. Most leaders are inured to that sort of thing. Thatcher would have snorted something contemptuous over her whisky. Blair and Bush II would have made polite noises about the right to peaceful protest whilst silently noting that it was they who are in the corridors of power making decisions. Trump gets really riled - he's spent his life surrounded by yes men and sycophants and he now has to cope with the fact that there are millions of people out there who think he's a pratt. It must be torture for him. I haven't been on a demo for years. Frankly, I can't wait.

Small hands! Bad hair! Get back over there!

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

I like it. And elder activists from the '60s have spoken well of modern signage -- witty, literate, and barbed. I count upon you guys to stick the blade in, hard. (For the scientist march in DC in April I am contemplating, "Heinlein Warned Us!")

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
(For the scientist march in DC in April I am contemplating, "Heinlein Warned Us!")

Cheeto won't get it. Unless they've reissued one of the juvenile series 140 characters at a time. With Trump inserted in each installment.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

It doesn't really matter if he gets it. Just get some good witty signs.

To amend an old song, when it comes to The Donald I think we can safely say "You're so vain. I bet you think this sign is about you".

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

LOL, Alan.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0