Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Il Palazzo]

Oh, my god. I never realised one can't disagree with other people, since it's all relative and we're all equally wrong! That is so profound I can't even.

[TD1]

Enlightenment has been achieved. Truly, I am glad.

[Il Palazzo]

Senpai-sama, you are so wise. Like some very wise guy, at the least. I hope one day you'll notice me.

[bloop_bleep]

Well, actually, I see some of the possible reasoning behind that statement. Those people likely have qualms not exactly with the fact that these representatives supported Remain, but with that these representatives are still actively fighting the Leave motion and trying to turn the tide the other direction, despite the public referendum already deciding to Leave.

That reasoning itself could be debated, but it’s best not to immediately dismiss these people as authoritarian shills.

[Great Order]

The people I'm mainly complaining about are the people insistent that remainers basically be turned into second-class citizens for the crime of holding thoughts that run contrary to the referendum result. It's not people that are being public with their opposition to the current state of affairs. They want to basically tear out anyone with a different ideology from having any position of authority in the country. It's literally McCarthy style thought processes.

[MorleyDev]

I have a family member who basically got told his opinion didn't matter when we got into a political discussion with a pro-No Deal family member. Thing is, he voted Leave but thinks No Deal is such a terrible idea he'd prefer Remain over No Deal. They argued that he should have known voting Leave meant No Deal and nothing else despite that definitely not being what was argued for at the time by a lot of pro-Leave politicians. I like to think he's a smart man, but he did believe the "easiest deal in the world" talk so sometimes I wonder -_-.

So not only do you not have a say if you voted remain in how we leave, but even if you voted Leave you clearly didn't understand what it meant unless you want No Deal (despite if you argue we have to honour a years old referendum come hell or high water then all it did is is take remain off the table and dictate nothing about how we leave. Well, technically all it did was commit the UK to trigger Article 50 and nothing else. We did that, can always cancel it now and technically still have fulfilled the referendum. But I'm at least trying to go with the spirit of the vote here ).

Problem is when you break down what people think is an acceptable compromise, Remain voters and Leave-voters-like-my-family-member come together to form the biggest block on "Customs Union". I guess this is the problem with narrow referendum results on any topic when the question has any room for interpretation or extrapolation, since if you go by the majority-of-the-majority you still can wind up with a minority if that interpretation it was put to a yes/no question.

EDIT: Replaced relation to me with generic 'family member', since revealing how someone else voted is a considered bad thing.

[scourge728]

Wasn't the referendum technically not even legally binding?

[MorleyDev]

Wasn't the referendum technically not even legally binding?

In the UK referendums are basically never considered anything but advisory. Only one I can think of that wasn't was the attempt to switch from First past the post to Alternative Vote about a little under decade ago. I was juuust too young to vote in that one myself.

[Great Order]

On today's episode of "Is this guy a lunatic, a moron, or making shit up for votes?" we have Robert Rowland, saying he wants a 200 mile fishing exclusion zone, where the UK torpedoes every foreign ship found in "our" waters.

So this is how the English reclaim Normandy.

[hector13]

I like how he says any ships within the 200 mile (presumably he meant nautical miles) radius will be treated like the Belgranao, which was a warship that was hunting British vessels, and was actually outside the 200 nautical mile exclusion zone when it was attacked.

Also, how does that work with the various countries that exist within the 200 mile radius? The channel will be frickin’ No Man’s Sea.

[Iduno]

On today's episode of "Is this guy a lunatic, a moron, or making shit up for votes?" we have Robert Rowland, saying he wants a 200 mile fishing exclusion zone, where the UK torpedoes every foreign ship found in "our" waters.

And it sounds like the answer to the question is a resounding "Yes."

[Great Order]

I like how he says any ships within the 200 mile (presumably he meant nautical miles) radius will be treated like the Belgranao, which was a warship that was hunting British vessels, and was actually outside the 200 nautical mile exclusion zone when it was attacked.

Also, how does that work with the various countries that exist within the 200 mile radius? The channel will be frickin’ No Man’s Sea.

The channel will be British waters. As will northern France, Belgium, the Netherlands, maybe a chunk of Norway, and a bit of Germany if it reaches far enough.

And Ireland, because we need to fix that Irish border issue and claiming them by right of them being in our sea sounds very British.

[smjjames]

And if we're including Gibraltar, Spain, bits of Morocco, the Strait of Gibraltar itself, then whatever is within 200 miles/kilometers of other British territories.

[Culise]

While we're at it, we can also finally solve the long-standing Falklands dispute by uniting the Falklands with Argentina.  ¿Las Malvinas son Argentinas?  The River Plate shall be Falklander.

[Kagus]

Didn't they try enforcing a no-fishing zone with Iceland before?

And Iceland beat the snot out of them with three fishing boats?