I thought the thread title was "The real problem with the EU is who's in control?" Surely this article directly relates to "who's in control"? So what do you reckon the point is about?
The real problem with the EU is whose in control.
- Thread starter gasbanni
- Start date
Sponsored Links
I think jock's point is that if RUK flounces out of the EU, it will lose what control it has in Europe, as one of the largest and most prosperous constituent nations.
An independent Scotland as a member of the EU will probably have as much influence as Slovakia.
An independent Scotland as a member of the EU will probably have as much influence as Slovakia.
Last edited:
I've not even broached the subject of Scottish independence .. I honestly don't care about UK control in the EU (you mentioned that) I'm more bothered about the EU control in the UK. So it seems your still wriggling and trying to cloud the issues.
Good question. What's your guess?
Sponsored Links
I have no idea what jock's point is or was.
I read the article before jock's post linking to it, and I thought Hmm, some journalists speculative thought on what might or might not be.
The first sentence had a "may" and two "if's"
I didn't see anything substantial in there to get worked up about. It was Mark Mardell's speculative ideas, nothing more, nothing less.
Moreover the article was about Angela Merkel's (and Germany's) influence in Europe, and whether it would be better tempered by us remaining in EU.
I saw some comment about Greece's complaints about Germany's influence.
I saw a speculative comment about Germany's influence if there was no EU.
I saw absolutely no comment about Angela Merkel's influence in UK.
So I'm still wondering what jock's point is.
We could all post links to journalists' speculative ideas, (sometimes passed off as 'insights', but still personal 'opinions) without adding our own interpretation of the article. But the forum would just be a copyboard of journalists links.
By the same token Himmy, All you have posted is speculative ideas of what the UK would be like following a Brexit. We simply don't know. No one knows. Anything any of us says can only be speculation. Yet you are prepared to argue every point someone arguing for an Brexit makes, saying it's only speculation, when you yourself can only speculate. Will things be better or worse if we leave? Will things get better if we remain? Your thoughts please.
Perhaps we should all try Jock's method of posting spurious links without saying why we post them, or what their relevance is.
Or we could save time by just looking at random pages on the web, which would be equally useful.
Or we could save time by just looking at random pages on the web, which would be equally useful.
Reread the last couple of weeks worth of posts.
Now what was your point, for the third time?
It must have been important, you posted the link twice, in different threads.
If you actually believe that, show us an example.
Or is it just another "anti-EU campaigner making things up?"
It's clear from jock's post that the European nations forming the EU need to continue working together for the benefit of all. If the UK, which is one of the larger European nations, isolates itself by leaving, it will not only be worse for RUK, but also for the rest of Europe.
Co-operation among equals is vital.
Co-operation among equals is vital.
Ah, I see. He's had an epiphany. I didn't realise.
That makes sense, I suppose.
Is jock still re-reading that article to find out what his point was?
Sponsored Links
